You don ' t know this juror . You never heard the juror talk . You don ' t object either . You can ' t .
This is why , during voire dire , one must place the importance of the jury as your # 1 priority . Not # 2 or # 3 , but # 1 . It is absolutely essential .
So , do you hire an expert who has that uncanny ability to analyze the length or shape of a nose ? Does this mean that you need to hire someone who can size up someone ' s forehead without a protractor ? Of course not . However , this does mean you must focus during this
time . Cut the clutter and cut to the chase .
MEMBERSHIP Still , some jurors will continue to hold down a heavy lip . No problem . You cannot open up every juror -- this is not necessary . However , the more you can listen to what the pool says , the better your ability to analyze the ' bad apples ' for your case .
On the flip side , on the issue of neutrality , many will say that the purpose of jury selection is to pick a neutral jury . This is true . At the same time , opposing counsels are " duking " it out to WIN for their clients . Their clients are not looking for absolute neutrality , but each client wants to tell the jury their side of the story , so that they will win .
Enter The Lawyer .
Open up , if you feel a lull during the process . Do not preach to them . So , how do you open up ? One way is to describe a personal event from your life . Allow yourself to be vulnerable . Give them a " piece of you ".
Is that it ? No .
In your mind without telling the jury what your case is about , you must tie your personal story to your case . Here ' s an example . Having practiced for many years , I have tried cases against prosecutors including litigating against large mega law firms for civil matters . During voire dire , I try , whenever I feel it is appropriate , to give the jury something about myself , such as how I was raised or what my mother or father used to tell me , or even what a former law professor used to say --
Whether you are home or traveling , you can take us
something that seemingly has absolutely nothing to do with trial or legalese . If my trial is purely about credibility in a he-said / she-said type of case , where my client ' s credibility vis-a-vis the alleged victim ' s credibility is on the line , I may describe an event where my father used to emphasize so firmly the importance of telling the bare naked truth under all and any circumstances . Having said this , I would want the jury ' s input on what they think about " lying ". Of course , everyone is going to frown upon lying ! What I am trying to get here is to have the jury talk and give their opinion of what it means to lie .
Whatisawhitelie ? Whatisablacklie ? Isaliealie ? Isa white lie actually still being honest and simply being courteous and inoffensive ? Can you lie unintentionally ? Or must there exist an " intent " to lie before you do it ? This will often bring out many responses .
Yes , we should be neutral , however , at the same time , we must adhere to our responsibility to advocate for our clients .
Neutrality ? This is the judge ' s primary role .
Therefore , when you are in the middle of jury selection , and you feel like the jury is simply not talking , take my advice and give a piece of yourself . You never know . Someone may in turn -- quid pro quo -- give a piece of themselves . Then your ability to analyze the pool may become much clearer than before .
www . atlantabar . org THE ATLANTA LAWYER 43