IMO, the motions to which these orders respond are due diligence on the part of the defense, which seeks to know as much as it can about prospective jurors and the jurors who are actually seated. I have no doubt they will do their own investigation, but with 1,000 potential jurors they'd have a gigantic task.
They will use the information to question prospective jurors during voir dire, of course, and when necessary to ask the judge to dismiss a juror for cause. If they are using a jury consultant, the information will be used to give the attorneys the consultant's sense whether they should use one of the defense's limited number of "peremptory strikes" to excuse a juror without cause.
I am not an attorney. But both my parents were litigators in Colorado. My dad is, still. My brother is a deputy district attorney in Colorado. My grandfather and uncle are trial attorneys (granddad is retired). I received an informal legal education at the dinner table, at family gatherings, at parties, nearly every day growing up. My family is very social, and I naturally acquired an extended network of friends with whom I remain in active contact, that includes attorneys on both sides; judges; elected officials; investigators private and public; forensic experts; and victim advocates. Although I chose a different career path than my parents did, I have a natural affinity for law and lawyers and a fascination with the justice system in the United States.
All that doesn't make me a lawyer, so I value the comments of our WS attorneys and you all should, too. Reserving the right to disagree, of course.
Last edited:
