Let's try to pick the perfect juror

[aprilshowers]

OT: I watched the movie "Nell" today ... Natasha Richardson was brilliant! Prayers for her family!

If you are the State you want someone who is female, middle aged or older ... preferably with children of their own, someone with a law enforcement background ... or someone that has been in some type of a positive relationship with a member of LE. The State will want people with linear analytical thinking skills based in science ... engineers, scientists, teachers, nurses ... etc, a conservative ... yes, even Christian ...

If you are the defense you want someone young or someone that had children young, who has a lot of "real life" experiences ... they will look for someone who is politically and socially liberal with a background in liberal arts ... someone prone to writing poetry, studying literature or the abstract ... someone who is normally able to think "outside of the box."

LOL ... you just described me for BOTH the State and the Defense. :crazy:

 

[LeLe1953]

The perfect juror? The one who votes guilty.

AND has a picture of old sparky on the fridge..

 

[tlcya]

perfect jurors

Casey's perspective: Male, cute, young, straight. (gonna be a looooong tiral donchaknow, might need some eye candy, especially since I can't flirt with my boys anymore)

Defense persective: Single young straight men, As few mothers as possible, perhaps a few middle aged but childless folks.

Prosecution persepctive: Pretty much anyone who speaks/reads english and hasn't been living under a rock for the last few years.

My persepctive: Normal mothers of children and anyone else who will do the RIGHT thing here.

 

[MD MOMMY]

In my opinion, a single parent would be on the prosecutions must have list. Unlike most single parents, Casey wasn't struggling, she could have given Caylee to her parents and stated so.

I guess it would depend on the circumstances behind the single parent. If the single parent sponged off their parents and partied non stop then the prosecution definitely wouldn't want them LOL.

 

[littlemisslegal]

i would assume not one of us would be eligible as we post about case. anyone who has attended the hearing in person would not be eligible i also guess. am i right? that leaves me out and you too if you read this as we both post here and other places possibly.

 

[qipx1]

the only way to exclude someone solely because of their race is through peremptory challenge.

It is unconstitutional for either the prosecutor [1] or the defense [2] to exclude someone based solely on race even in the form of a peremptory.

[1] http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_6263
[2] http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_91_372

 

[qipx1]

If the single parent sponged off their parents and partied non stop then the prosecution definitely wouldn't want them LOL.

Those Jurors find excuses not to serve on Jury duty/ "forget" to open their mail.

 

[ynotdivein]

Bumping this thread for discussion.

 

[Knot4u2no]

It is unconstitutional for either the prosecutor [1] or the defense [2] to exclude someone based solely on race even in the form of a peremptory.

[1] http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_6263
[2] http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_91_372

Thank you for the Post.

Regardless of constitutionality, in Casey’s particular case, I think picking a jury based on any factors of racial bias would be risky, with a 50-50 chance of backfiring. For example, perhaps a “person of color” is selected by the prosecution based on the assumption that such a juror would have strong family values, thus more likely to have strong feelings and opinions against a mother who would intentionally harm their own child. Maybe so, but they might also be more inclined to see “the prosecuted” as being a victim of the state, regardless of guilt or innocence. On the other hand, perhaps the defense selects a white male or female, expecting more identification with Casey, thus more empathy/sympathy for her plight, guilty or not. Maybe so, but such identification may result in their wishing to distance themselves from her as much as possible, making them more inclined to convict and seek the maximum penalty.

My personal opinion,
Russell

 

[Softail]

Bumping this thread for discussion.

Thank you for bumping this! I was curious what folks thought about the people each side would be looking for. Interesting comments here! :tyou:

 

[Kitty Kat]

The perfect juror (for the duh-fense) would be someone like my mom, I mean this half jokingly. She has seizures and doesn't always remember things. She knows I've followed this case since day 31 and she even watched NG a lot with me in the beginning. I'm not sure if it's her bad memory or just the fact my mom doesn't seem to believe a young mother would hurt her child but everytime Casey comes up it's the same discussion.

My mom: Maybe she didn't do it. Maybe one of the guys she was hanging with did something to the little girl.

Me: If that was the case, as a mother, why would you not report it right away.

My mom: Maybe they threatened her?

Me: But that wouldn't explain why she was out partying the whole time. That isn't a distraught mother.

My mom: Did they ever find Caylee? (for like the 100th time)

Me: Yea, they found her 6 months later right down the street from her house. (again, telling her this for like the 100th time..She'll forget again by next week)

My mom: yea, well maybe she did do it then.

Then we get into all the details, fake nanny, fake job, stealing, lying... By the end my mom is convinced Casey did it, without a doubt. However a few weeks pass and my mom forgets everything we talked about and the cycle begins all over again. I think the defense would love my mom as a juror, horrible memory and easily persuaded, lol.

*edited to clarify that my mom would be the perfect juror for the defense, not the prosecution.

 

[Bee Charmer]

I don't care if the jurors are white, black, yellow, brown or green. Young or old. I just want them to possess two qualities:

Common sense

and

The ability to understand the meaning of REASONABLE doubt and CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.

If we get this, we'll also get Justice for Caylee, imo.

 

[Kitty Kat]

I don't care if the jurors are white, black, yellow, brown or green. Young or old. I just want them to possess two qualities:

Common sense

and

The ability to understand the meaning of REASONABLE doubt and CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.

If we get this, we'll also get Justice for Caylee, imo.

I agree..

I don't really think it matters what demographic they come from. Sure maybe a young single man may think she's pretty (eww!) when they first see her but I don't think her looks are enough to make up for what she did to her sweet, cute, precious little girl. They will see her for the cold, uncaring, lying sleaze that she is.

 

[ScubaTwinn]

JP stated in the middle of March that 20 jurors would be selected. I'm looking for the link.

 

[LambChop]

When I was picked for a jury it was the very last thing I wanted to do. Too many things going on in my life at the time, deadlines, etc. Life without me got along just fine. What I did learn from being on a jury was invaluable. It is an experience, good or bad, you will learn a lot from it. I would do it again if called. jmo

 

[Dignity4Victims]

The perfect Juror -

for acquittal: A cadaver.

for conviction: Any thinking person with a lukewarm pulse.

 

[kaRN]

I think it's pretty clear that just about anyone would make a great juror in this case from a prosecution perspective.
I have 2 sons in the age group that allegedly might be inclined to want to relate to ICA if they were selected as jurors. (How tactful am I LOL!)
I showed them one of her court close ups and the 21yo said she wasn't his type and the 26yo said she looks about 40. Neither were inclined to think of her as hot. As a matter of fact they both rolled their eyes at me and told me to google hot.
Casey as we see her haggard and pale in her ill fitting clothes, overcompensating for the fact she has no shame by ignoring the court proceedings as though she's above them, isn't hot. She's a hot mess so no fear of young male jurors IMO, especially after they hear what JG and TL and 18 other guys she played have to say on the stand.
Young single Mothers relating to ICA possibly? I was one once, and my baby was my life. IMO unless they seat a jury of sociopath single Mothers, there won't be a lot of compassion from that group either. I imagine that group would find JG very compelling offering to marry ICA and take on the role of Daddy, only to be dumped for loving the baby too much. WTH!!
Middle aged people have daughters and sons who they will compare to ICA. They will go to bed during trial wondering what they would do if it was ever their son played by an ICA or what they would excpect their own daughter to do if their 2yo was kidnapped. There won't be a lot of tolerance for the dramatic eye rolling smug attitude of 25yo, know it all ICA from this group IMO.
Older jurors will look to SP and their hearts will melt for her. Those here who feel they won't tolerate the swinging single lifestyle of ICA are mistaken IMO. These are the original swingers, the hippies, the free thinkers with 50 years of experience living since the 60's. 'Free Love' died with AIDS for this generation. They'll see ICA as an airhead who had choices and made all the wrong ones IMO.

I think the fear is stealth jurors but I believe they'll be pretty apparent by either their glares at the defense table or looks in that direction for some ICA eye contact. All the others who look at the lawyer questioning them and avoid ICA altogether are probably suitable.

Great thread! Tks for starting it!

 

[Knot4u2no]

I found this post I made in 2009 ... thought I would repost it:

I once was hired to represent the defense in jury selection in the penalty phase of a double murder trial. I developed a two factor 10-point scale (factor 1 Position for or against, and factor 2 Group influence/determination). Multiply the numbers and you have a 0 to 100 point rating. I paid minimal attention to the usual demographics, relying primarily on my estimation of both factors based on the prospective jurors’ general demeanor and responses to questions asked by the attorney. The process was much like a poker game, with each side having a limited number of strikes (eliminating a potential juror). We ended up with 11 of 12 jurors favorable to our position based on the selection scale (my recommendation was not followed for the other). When the verdict was in, 9 of the 11 voted against the death penalty.

IMO, Factor 2 is extremely important ... it only takes 1 or 2 determined jurors to change everything.

Russell

 

[dog.gone.cute]

The perfect juror? The one who votes guilty.

BBM: I totally agree !

:rocker:

:woohoo: :woohoo:

 

[hornswoggled]

The ideal juror in my opinion is someone who can sit down and feel the weight of their duty. It is an awesome thing to sit in a juror's chair and hear without prejudice, the evidence presented from both sides - A juror who can listen very carefully to the instructions given by the judge and deliberate justly and fairly. It is truly a humbling experience to serve, and that is exactly what a juror must do - serve the justice system.

There are people of all ages and backgrounds who can accomplish this task. I pray that each person selected can be fair and bring a thoughtful and just verdict. We cannot ask for more than that.