Someone was commenting yesterday about which juror demographics are most likely to distrust LE; and said this jury was made up primarily of working-class women.
Other than gender, do we have any information on the demographics of this jury?
The subject of the jury has been frequently broached on this forum. I have heard among other things:
1) A jury, primarily composed of minority women, one who has a night job working for a ???, are not going to have sympathy for NC and her posse. (I thought that was posted today or last night, but it has disappeared...???)
2) This jury will never be able to understand how $300 could not be a good allowance.
3) That the jurors are probably reading here, but, (I'm paraphrasing other posts), "Oh, I couldn't go 3 weeks without sneaking a look at a paper, or forum, or news cast, either." (Thus implying it would be natural and okay to do so...)
4) And, the jury is tired of listening and wants to go home and they said just after Mrs. C brought the ducks to court.
5) The jury is too loud (giggling, laughing), too sensitive (jury requesting people in courtroom not stare at them), and too impatient (recent note about when is the trial going to end.)
These comments and ideas are very interesting. Someone else alluded to the fact the Kurtz and Company spent too much on jury consultants and didn't have funds left for expert witnesses.
I've asked a couple of times who the jury/trial consultants are, but either no one knows or my voice is too weak to be heard. I've tried Googling for the information, but haven't been able to locate it. If someone can point me in the right direction, I am still interested in this information.
When the trial began, I wondered how any defense jury/trial consultant could have been comfortable with 8 women and 2 men in a trial of this nature. Then I started to piece together the impetus of the posts and the composition of the jury.
This is only theoretical, so please don't attack me for my suggestion of a manner in which this jury could be perceived as beneficial to the defense. (These are just demographic observations, not personal feelings...)
A jury/trial consultant may have felt that:
1. Some of the jurors may be economically disadvantaged and/or a minority, apt to be unsympathetic to NC's spending habits and/or needs.
2. Some may be technologically challenged and less apt to own a computer because of my gender or race.
3. That the jurors economic background, racial makeup, and gender make them less able to sustain attention to detail and testimony; and, more likely to be prejudiced against CPD and understanding of wrongful accusations.
If this is the case, this could backfire for the defense. Kurtz and company and the DA's office accepted this panel. I would be interested in their observations and comments if any exist now....or later.
If I were a member of the jury, reading here when I've been asked not to, I would be angry and indignant to be selected to be part of this group because of my race, gender, and/or economic background because someone felt I would be less able to remain unbiased and less capable of acting as a fair and impartial juror.
Did anyone attend the voir dire phase? I guess the public normally does not watch that portion of the trial, correct? Did anyone see the jury questionnaire?
Just wondering...
