The State's argument against COV rested upon numbers. The DT argued that the Irwin US Supreme Court ruling had mandated a different standard in cases where pervasive pre-trial publicity could be demonstrated. The standard in such cases was that prospective jurors' claims of impartiality could not be trusted, in essence, and that juror bias must be presumed.
Staley's statements when ruling in favor of the COV indicate she accepted the Irwin standard. She specifically pointed out that at least some jurors who said in questionnaires they could be impartial reversed themselves when testifying, and likewise, at least some jurors who they couldn't be impartial also reversed themselves in testimony. Bias must be assumed.
