It takes years of experience and many trials to learn how to be good at picking a jury, and even them some lawyers just never figure it out. Be myself. A lawyer, myself included, must use his own personality as he speaks to a jury. It never works to try to be someone you are not. The jury will pick up on the phony presentation and the lawyer as well as his client will lose all credibility.
Example: I like movies so I will use popular movies to illustrate a point I am trying to discuss with the jury. I do not and have not read classic literature so I never try to quote Shakespeare. Be brutally honest.
If there is a weak spot in your case, admit it during jury selection and talk to the jury about their feelings. The jurors will eventually see the weak spot anyway and the honesty of the lawyer in presenting it up front will gain him and the defendant a lot of credibility when it is needed to sway the jury on issues or facts that are in contention.
Inform the jury about the defense. It is very important to get your defense in front of the jury as soon as possible to start to chip away at the assumption that most people have that the defendant is guilty or he would not be on trial. Reasonable doubt must be planted as soon as possible.
Example: Question Mr. Jones what are some motives that you can think of that a person might make a false allegation? Answer by Juror Anger. In a civil case, the jury will determine the degree of fault any given party holds, which will have a direct effect on the award amount you will receive.
From the side of the plaintiff , jury selection is actually much more a process of dismissal than selection; that is, your attorney wants to weed out undesirable members. The plaintiff always goes first, which means they get to set the tone for jury selection.
Especially in an injury suit or wrongful death case, the goal is to get the jury to sympathize with the suffering of their client. Very often, union employees make for good prosecution jurors as they are used to fighting injustice. People who are prone to look unfavorably on big corporations are good for cases like product liability and trucking accident cases.
The defense, on the other hand, wants the exact opposite. This, however, requires a careful balancing act. Since the defense goes second in jury selection, they need to adapt and adjust to the tactics established by the prosecution. Next, the lawyers for each side question the potential jurors about their biases and backgrounds, as well as any pre-existing knowledge they might have about the case. The attorneys can also ask questions designed to uncover characteristics or experiences that might cause potential jurors to favor either the prosecution or the defense.
But the lawyers aren't allowed to ask overly personal questions, and they aren't allowed ask the jurors how they would decide the case in advance. After they have completed questioning, the lawyers begin removing potential jurors from the venire by making challenges for cause and peremptory challenges. Challenges for cause are made when voir dire reveals that a juror is not qualified, able, or fit to serve in a particular case.
Lawyers generally have an unlimited number of "for cause" challenges available. In order to serve as a juror, a person must be a U. Also, each person must be able to physically sit through the entire trial as well as hear and understand the trial testimony. Jurors must also be mentally aware enough to comprehend and apply the judge's legal instructions.
Any person who doesn't meet these criteria will be dismissed "for cause. Judges will also dismiss jurors who can't put aside their feelings and apply the law impartially—that is, without actual or implied bias. Actual Bias. Actual bias arises when potential jurors admit that they wouldn't be able to be impartial. For example, a juror who states that she would never vote for a guilty verdict in any case because her religious beliefs prevent her from sitting in judgment of another would be excused for cause.
Implied Bias. Implied bias is present when potential jurors have character traits or personal experiences that make it unlikely for them to be able to be impartial, regardless of what they say during voir dire. So, a juror who is a close friend or relative of a key party, a witness, the judge, or an attorney for either side will be dismissed for cause.
Bias is also implied when a would-be juror's background or experience is likely to create a predisposition in favor of a party to the case. For example, in a case involving school teachers accused of fraudulently misrepresenting standardized test scores, any teachers in the panel will probably be excused for cause even if those teachers swear in voir dire that they can be impartial.
The judge decides the outcome of an objection, sometimes after allowing attorneys on both sides to comment before making a ruling. Closing arguments are the final opportunity for the prosecutor and the defense attorney to talk to the jury.
These arguments allow both attorneys to summarize the testimony and evidence, and ask the jury to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty.
After being charged, the jury goes into deliberation, the process of deciding whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty. During this process, no one associated with the trial can contact the jury without the judges and lawyers. If the jury has a question on the law, they must write a note to the judge, which the judge will read in court with all parties present.
In federal criminal trials, the jury must reach a unanimous decision in order to convict the defendant. After they reach an agreement on a verdict, they notify the judge, the lawyers, and the defendant in open court.
Everyone is present in court for the reading of the verdict. The United States Marshals Service is present during trial to protect the judge and prosecutors from potential harm. If the defendant is found not guilty, they are usually free to go home. You are here U.
Attorneys » Justice
0コメント