6 ms·

> People drastically overestimate what will get you moved out of the pool. If you say in voir dire that you wouldn't vote to convict even if the person is guil

> People drastically overestimate what will get you moved out of the pool. If you say in voir dire that you wouldn't vote to convict even if the person is guilty, you're not going to get put on a jury.

tptacek 4y ago
No, but you might be put in a jail cell overnight for contempt.
- Alex3917 4y ago
  The reason they ask you questions like whether or not you would be able to find someone guilty if you knew they might get sentenced to death isn't because they want to put you in jail overnight. They just don't want you on the jury.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Sure, but that's not the same thing as saying you won't vote to convict under any circumstances.
    - jrochkind1 4y ago
      You can certainly say you won't vote to convinct under any circumstances during voir dire. It's not illegal in any way. It won't get you thrown in jail for contempt. It is probably protected by the first ammendment to say so. It will get you excluded from the jury. People do it all the time, in fact. The exact standard questions asked of jurors in voir dire vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but usually include some variation of if there any religious, philosophical, or ethical reasons you could not convict (or not acquit) generally. I mean, imagine if you had philosophical, ethical, or reliigous reasons you couldn't convict under any circumstances and you wound up on the jury anyway! If you didn't tell the court this when asked and wound up on the jury cause you lied about it... you probably still wouldn't actually be considered in contempt, but it'd be bad.
- lokar 4y ago
  I explained I would never impose the death penalty (it was 1st degree murder) and I was excused
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    I wonder whether that strongly suggests that most people (everyone?) who serves on the jury for a 1st degree murder case then believes the death penalty is just.
    - kasey_junk 4y ago
      My jury was a 1st degree case but the prosecution was not seeking the death penalty and my state has a de facto ban on them.
- dannyw 4y ago
  In reality, I don't think this ever happens unless you had a bad attitude.
- TechBro8615 4y ago
  This is complete BS and I would posit you’re just making things up. Link me to an article about a potential juror spending at least one night in jail due to saying they won’t convict during pre-trial jury selection.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Sure: just search for [voir dire contempt]. The first SERP for me had a law firm page with examples when I looked earlier this evening. I'm not saying it's likely, for what it's worth, but if you lie to avoid jury selection (which is what they're going to think you're doing), it's a possibility.
    - TechBro8615 4y ago
      I got that SERP. The examples are all cases against courts for various violations during _voir dire_. I did not see a single example of a potential juror being jailed for contempt before the trial even started. This isn’t surprising; why would the judge bother holding someone in contempt rather than just moving onto the next potential juror in the pool? It’s not like there is a risk of mistrial from the actions of someone not even participating in it yet.
refurb 4y ago
Sit through jury selection and you'll see people vastly overestimate their ability to convince a prosecutor that they truly believe that. When I observed jury selection I saw several people back down from stances that were clearly attempts to get kicked off the jury. It's not like the lawyers ask one question then dismiss you. I did see one guy who claimed he believed "all courts are invalid" hold up to some pretty intense questioning before getting dismissed. But by the grin on his face I could tell he relished winning that one.
- brewdad 4y ago
  I can just picture the wrong judge thinking "Give me a reason. Just one reason...and I'll show you who's valid"
  - refurb 4y ago
    Seemed like the attorneys and judge knew what was up. The reasons that seemed to get a quick dismissal were people who had been victims of crime in the past, people who had family members who were police officers, lawyers, judges. People who held not uncommon beliefs that would bias them (e.g. "I believe that people of color can't get a fair trial"), but not always if the juror said they could make a decision without that bias clouding their judgement. The ones that picked extreme beliefs just got more questioning until they either admitted their belief wouldn't cloud their judge or that their belief wasn't so extreme as to bias them. I mean, the judge and lawyers question people for a living, so they know exactly how to drill down and force an answer out.
kasey_junk 4y ago
On the trial I was on the judge literally said the words “the next person that tries to get out of this jury for bogus reasons is getting cited for contempt”. No one, not the judge, the prosecutors or the defense want jury selection to take a long time and there are only so many people in the pool to choose from. That said, on a different trial, a serial killer, it took almost 6 weeks to panel a jury. I was there for a week before being dismissed because I’m morally against the death penalty. Even then the judge interviewed me for 30 minutes on this point, including about my religious upbringing as a child.

tptacek 4y ago

No, but you might be put in a jail cell overnight for contempt.

Alex3917 4y ago
The reason they ask you questions like whether or not you would be able to find someone guilty if you knew they might get sentenced to death isn't because they want to put you in jail overnight. They just don't want you on the jury.
- tptacek 4y ago
  Sure, but that's not the same thing as saying you won't vote to convict under any circumstances.
  - jrochkind1 4y ago
    You can certainly say you won't vote to convinct under any circumstances during voir dire. It's not illegal in any way. It won't get you thrown in jail for contempt. It is probably protected by the first ammendment to say so. It will get you excluded from the jury. People do it all the time, in fact. The exact standard questions asked of jurors in voir dire vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but usually include some variation of if there any religious, philosophical, or ethical reasons you could not convict (or not acquit) generally. I mean, imagine if you had philosophical, ethical, or reliigous reasons you couldn't convict under any circumstances and you wound up on the jury anyway! If you didn't tell the court this when asked and wound up on the jury cause you lied about it... you probably still wouldn't actually be considered in contempt, but it'd be bad.
lokar 4y ago
I explained I would never impose the death penalty (it was 1st degree murder) and I was excused
- andsoitis 4y ago
  I wonder whether that strongly suggests that most people (everyone?) who serves on the jury for a 1st degree murder case then believes the death penalty is just.
  - kasey_junk 4y ago
    My jury was a 1st degree case but the prosecution was not seeking the death penalty and my state has a de facto ban on them.
dannyw 4y ago
In reality, I don't think this ever happens unless you had a bad attitude.
TechBro8615 4y ago
This is complete BS and I would posit you’re just making things up. Link me to an article about a potential juror spending at least one night in jail due to saying they won’t convict during pre-trial jury selection.
- tptacek 4y ago
  Sure: just search for [voir dire contempt]. The first SERP for me had a law firm page with examples when I looked earlier this evening. I'm not saying it's likely, for what it's worth, but if you lie to avoid jury selection (which is what they're going to think you're doing), it's a possibility.
  - TechBro8615 4y ago
    I got that SERP. The examples are all cases against courts for various violations during _voir dire_. I did not see a single example of a potential juror being jailed for contempt before the trial even started. This isn’t surprising; why would the judge bother holding someone in contempt rather than just moving onto the next potential juror in the pool? It’s not like there is a risk of mistrial from the actions of someone not even participating in it yet.

refurb 4y ago

Sit through jury selection and you'll see people vastly overestimate their ability to convince a prosecutor that they truly believe that. When I observed jury selection I saw several people back down from stances that were clearly attempts to get kicked off the jury. It's not like the lawyers ask one question then dismiss you. I did see one guy who claimed he believed "all courts are invalid" hold up to some pretty intense questioning before getting dismissed. But by the grin on his face I could tell he relished winning that one.

brewdad 4y ago
I can just picture the wrong judge thinking "Give me a reason. Just one reason...and I'll show you who's valid"
- refurb 4y ago
  Seemed like the attorneys and judge knew what was up. The reasons that seemed to get a quick dismissal were people who had been victims of crime in the past, people who had family members who were police officers, lawyers, judges. People who held not uncommon beliefs that would bias them (e.g. "I believe that people of color can't get a fair trial"), but not always if the juror said they could make a decision without that bias clouding their judgement. The ones that picked extreme beliefs just got more questioning until they either admitted their belief wouldn't cloud their judge or that their belief wasn't so extreme as to bias them. I mean, the judge and lawyers question people for a living, so they know exactly how to drill down and force an answer out.

kasey_junk 4y ago

On the trial I was on the judge literally said the words “the next person that tries to get out of this jury for bogus reasons is getting cited for contempt”. No one, not the judge, the prosecutors or the defense want jury selection to take a long time and there are only so many people in the pool to choose from. That said, on a different trial, a serial killer, it took almost 6 weeks to panel a jury. I was there for a week before being dismissed because I’m morally against the death penalty. Even then the judge interviewed me for 30 minutes on this point, including about my religious upbringing as a child.