Jury Selection And Ethical Dilemmas
Within the court system, bias and prejudice exists. The courts take measures to try to prevent these biases and prejudices from affecting their proceedings and the outcomes of the cases. Even with the courts best prevention efforts many ethical issues arise. One area where many ethical issues are present is in jury selection and within the jury itself. The process of jury selection is called voir dire (Starr & McCormick, pg. 21). However, it is not as much of a selection process as it is an elimination process, where potential jurors are dismissed for a variety of reasons (Politan, 2013). Although they are not always completely successful in their attempt, this is the courts way of trying to prevent a biased jury.
The beginning of …show more content…
In a criminal case during a trial any direct or indirect private communication, contact, or tampering related to the case with a juror can be considered prejudicial (Quick, pg. 5). There have been many mistrials, requiring a new trial to be ordered because of third party contact. In the case of United States. Maree & Brooks, Brooks had a conviction of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. The decision was reversed and a new trial was ordered, because a juror discussed the case with her friends during her jury duty. One of her friends stated, “People like that should be incarcerated.” In this example, it is probable that bias could arise in the juror because of third party contact. There are many cases that have been reversed due to a third party tampering with the jury, because it lead to a biased decision from that …show more content…
In the voir dire, when selecting the jury, attorneys are biased in that they will do what they can to win the case. Therefore, both attorneys select jurors that they believe will decide the verdict in favor of their side. Prosecutors are more likely to excuse those they feel will decide in favor of the defendant, and defense attorneys are more likely to excuse those they think will decide against their clients. Since each side is allowed their certain amount of peremptory challenges that they do not need to provide a reason for, they are able to choose jurors they believe will decide in their favor (Politan,
The beginning of …show more content…
In a criminal case during a trial any direct or indirect private communication, contact, or tampering related to the case with a juror can be considered prejudicial (Quick, pg. 5). There have been many mistrials, requiring a new trial to be ordered because of third party contact. In the case of United States. Maree & Brooks, Brooks had a conviction of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. The decision was reversed and a new trial was ordered, because a juror discussed the case with her friends during her jury duty. One of her friends stated, “People like that should be incarcerated.” In this example, it is probable that bias could arise in the juror because of third party contact. There are many cases that have been reversed due to a third party tampering with the jury, because it lead to a biased decision from that …show more content…
In the voir dire, when selecting the jury, attorneys are biased in that they will do what they can to win the case. Therefore, both attorneys select jurors that they believe will decide the verdict in favor of their side. Prosecutors are more likely to excuse those they feel will decide in favor of the defendant, and defense attorneys are more likely to excuse those they think will decide against their clients. Since each side is allowed their certain amount of peremptory challenges that they do not need to provide a reason for, they are able to choose jurors they believe will decide in their favor (Politan,