What kind of questions can they ask in jury selection?

Can you bake a pie?

[quote]Can you bake a pie?

"No."

" Neither can I."

Yes, to all of those, OP. They can ask whatever they want.

On the other hand, you can answer as you choose. You can't lie, but you can give evasive or non-answers.

Never been summoned. Do they interview everyone in a big group or is it private?

They'll ask pretty much anything OP about your education level, finances, even relationship status, gay or straight. It depends on the type of case and what each side wants from the jury members. If you're a lawyer or in law school, they'll pretty much automatically dismiss you since they typically don't want people on the jury who know something about the law.

That's how they suss out the queens, R2.

Who was the hottest hunk of the 1980s? That's a pretty standard one to expect.

You might just sit around all day--most people don't get chosen for a panel (a group of people who serve as the pool for a given jury). It also depends on the charges and circumstances of the case. I was on a panel for a case with charges against a cop. People with law enforcement types in their family were excused. I had been involved in screening police candidates and I argued that would prejudice me--police depts get stuck with people whom they know will be trouble because they don't always have control over when they can hire and how many they can hire--they hope the bad apples will washout at the academy, but they often don't. I also figured if the case came to a jury trial, the evidence must be overwhelming. People who get tossed in one place might be kept elsewhere---being a lawyer or any other kind of professional whose background might be relevant will get you tossed in many places, but in DC which is filled with people like this it isn't always a disqualification. There often is a limit to the number of people who can be disqualified by the lawyers involved and that may affect the questioning.

Just lie about your sexual orientation or any other personal questions if they make you uncomfortable. It's only perjury if they can prove it, plus when's the last time anyone's been charged with perjury anyway? That's only a thing on TV.

Let me ask you something... Have you ever had your cock sucked by a man? Ever been porked? Or had a man smoke your pole?

They have you fill out a detailed questionnaire first, R4, and then, if they decide to, they might ask you questions in front of the judge and rest of the jury pool.

I've been on several juries and the questions were minimal, if any. On one jury, they didn't ask me a single question. I was number 3 in line and just automatically got put on the jury. On another one where I indicated I had a problem with drinking and driving, the judge asked me if I understood the law, that you could have a drink and still drive legally if you were under the legal limit. I responded that I understood the law.

I would imagine it would have to be a pretty high profile case for them to really dig into you personally. They might try to exclude people who had a similar life experience as the victim. If it were a rape case they could try to exclude people who had been raped in the past for example.

I've served on a jury twice. They ask me if I read or watch news and what papers I read or channels I watch for news. Also, what TV shows I watch. They don't want any arm chair detectives on the jury - so I always figured that was the reason for some of that.

The third time I was called it was for a rape case - and I really wasn't up for that and for victim testimony. So when they asked what TV shows I watched definitely mentioned Law and Order SVU, a few of those Investigation Discovery shows, also when asked about the media I consume I mentioned podcast and made sure to mention true crime. I was excused.

Top or bottom

I was on a jury selection once and they asked our occupations. One woman said “writer”. The judge asked if she planned to write about the case. The woman said she wouldn’t write anything if she was a juror but couldn’t promise that she wouldn’t use elements of the case in her future writing. She was let go immediately.

Just be careful OP, if you're on a high-profile case. Your whole life can become media fodder.

Tell them you're a lawyer, one that works for "the Man" (represents interests of the big guy, not the little guy).

Every defense attorney will boot you immediately.

What's your IQ, sugar? Any guesses?

OP said he doesn't want to be booted, R17.

I was asked if there was any personal reason that would interfere with me serving on the jury. At the time I was taking classes and had an exam in the next couple of weeks and told them I'm more focused on the exam than the trial. I was dismissed.

Did you admit to Daily Mail, r13?

They ask what you do, where you live etc, then any questions which might preclude you from being selected. I was called last year. You go register sit in a big room for half the day then I went and got Starbucks. Came back and they released us for the day. The next day I had to come back, the same routine, they called 12 people and then said if you have not been called you are released and they gave me a paper that said I served so if I get called again in two years I don't have to do it. I asked them, "If you know I served why would I get called again?" and the lady just shruged. Sure enough, I got called this year, I replied online that i had served and put in the number from the paper and i was excused.

Do not lie!

I would also recommend bringing a book or some work to do during the jury selection process, especially if you live in a city. It can take most of a day and you'll be sitting around a lot.

Be careful, OP.

It’s not uncommon for potential jurors with the wrong answers to get whisked right off to jail themselves!

That’s how they caught Ted Bundy.

I took my tablet and headphones. Watched movies all day long.

Rosebud or coinslot?

Cut or uncut? From now on, they might want to ask that question as uncut jurors would be more pragmatic.

I was called to jury duty once when I lived in Chicago.

After waiting a few hours, maybe 90 mins., they called me to the stand and mispronounced my name so I corrected them. The two lawyers, prosecution and defence, looked at one another and then one said, "You're dismissed." Which was fine with me. lol

Seems like asking sexual orientation is unnecessarily intrusive. Why would that impact anything?

In Philadelphia you're pulled from a big riom to a courtroom. They do not describe the case but they ask general questions with everyone present. Raise your hand if a member of your family is in law enforcement. Raise your hand if you work for the government etc. Nothing overly personal.

You're dismissed to the hallway and everyone is called in one at a time to be questioned by the judge and attorneys. One time I had worked for one of the attorneys and was excused. Another time I mentioned I worked for a criminal attorney and the jidge dismissed me because he thought I "would know too much" LOL. One time I was asked if I knew anyone who was raped and the outcome of the case. So I assumed it was a rape case, but again, they never go into details of the case. The judge approves reasons why people can be excused without it costing the attorney against the number of strikes they are allowed.

TL;DR. You fill out a questionnaire, they ask broad questions in front of other people and you are personally questioned privately. It's never gone beyond work history and "could you be fair" type questions..

I’ve never in my life heard that anyone gets penalized for not going. No jail time, not even a fine. Does anyone know if this is true?

Do you drink piss?

It is a summons and you're legally required to at least show up. It's a matter of the resources they have to enforce.

If you don't want to answer the question, then tell them that you find their questions to be rude and inappropriate. That's what I always do.

I've been on juries multiple times. I always seem to get selected. I've been foreman twice.

One case was where someone was suing a grocery store after the person allegedly slipped and fell. During the selection process, they asked if I shopped at XYZ store, had ever sued anyone for damages, had any association with law firms, etc. Another trail was a gang-related murder trial. They asked if I had ever been a victim of gang violence or street crime, if a family member or close associate had ever been mugged, etc. Beyond asking my occupation, they never asked income, sexual orientation, marital status, or other personal questions.

During the pre-trail screening process for the murder trial a woman told the judge she was under treatment for breast cancer and asked to be excused. He told her he himself was currently being treated for prostrate cancer and was able to schedule his treatment around his work schedule. Request denied.

If you go in looking like a normal, nondescript, middle class / middle age adult, you're likely get selected.

"Do you believe the 2020 election was stolen?"

"Have you posted negative things about law enforcement on Truth Social or Gab?"

"Do you believe stealing and selling classified secrets is a serious crime?"

[quote] I took my tablet and headphones. Watched movies all day long.

When I was called we could not bring in tablets or computers or phones. They showed us HGTV while we waited. Someone brought cards. I read a book.

OP, keep in mind that neither side’s lawyers will want to alienate you. They won’t ask you anything that will be humiliating or push to make such an answer, because they don’t want you to hate them and then end up on the jury.

'Got any Irish in you?'

No.

"Want some?"

[quote] Do they interview everyone in a big group or is it private

I've been to exactly 2 selection: in the first one, it's done in front of fully packed courtroom and it got really embarrasing with some of the questions. I was just glad the jury got filled up and I didn't get interviewed. The 2nd time - it's more private with only the judge, the 2 lawyers and me. So I guess it just might be on the judge's discretion? Notable though was the first one is civil and the 2nd is criminal - so not sure if that's a factor.

[quote]During the pre-trail screening process for the murder trial a woman told the judge she was under treatment for breast cancer and asked to be excused. He told her he himself was currently being treated for prostrate cancer and was able to schedule his treatment around his work schedule. Request denied.

About twice a year, there's a news story about how an ambulance was called to a courtroom because a judge insisted that someone who was sick wasn't actually sick enough, and forced them into jury duty.

When I was called for Grand Jury duty a few years ago, I filled out a form and showed up on the date I was given. No in-person interview or questions. There were 23 of us and we took a group oath.

Pretty much anything. Mine had the defendant's Robin Leach twin going on about how people are discriminated against, and then he told the whole group of us as he was questioning that people don't understand how people are discriminated against. He fucking pointed at me a regular white guy and asked "you have never faced real discrimination, have you?" Expecting a solid no. I looked at him and said, "I'm gay so figure that one out for yourself Perry Mason."

I glanced at the judge, he had a smile.

I know in my area if a person responds with a medical record of some sort showing they are bipolar or szichoprenic they get a letter back saying they don't even have to show up at the courthouse. But that's the only thing I know of that works immediately.

R41 Embarrassing how?

"prostrate cancer"

Oh, dear!

That seems a bit shitty to refuse to excuse someone who's receiving treatment for breast cancer. What if the chemo made them really tired and sick?

r46 it’s awhile back but I remember simple questions like - were your ever married or do you have a job can be embarrassing for some. Well for those never been married or unemployed. You feel like the whole room was judging you.

Maybe I'm a shameless lazy slut, but why is it embarrassing to say you've never been married or are unemployed? We can fulfil civil duties too.

Have you ever presented hole to get out of a traffic ticket?

It's been my experience that gay men are favorites of lawyers and have a higher chance of being picked to sit on a jury. I've never seen them ask anyone if they were gay during my jury duty experiences, but it's fairly easy for them to assume. You have to fill out a questionnaire asking if you are married and have kids. A single guy in his 40s+ with no children has a high probability of being gay. I think they assume that gay men are more liberal, less judgmental and less religious, which makes them less likely to convict others. For more last 2 jury duties, I think almost half the final juries ended up being gay men.

I was on a jury related to a grocery store incident. They never asked me anything about the store and it was the store I shopped at every week. Every single witness was a grocery store employee that I saw regularly.

How many cocks can you take in your ass at once?

"Who is your favorite member of the Legion of Super-Heroes?"

Only if you are a lesbian, r55.

[quote]Have you ever presented hole to get out of a traffic ticket?

Follow up question: "Would you like to?"

r56 Feel free to enjoy Element Lad, Star Boy(the vintage one) is more my type.

I was called once for jury selection with about 80 others in the same room. It was an underage sexual predator case. When the defense attorney called my name, he had the answers I filled in online before my scheduled date to appear. I answered the questionnaire that I worked for a major airline as a flight attendant and my SO did as well. I also mentioned that I was a regular supporter of the Sandy Hook Promise organization. He started out telling everyone that I was a male flight attendant (a subtle way of saying GAY!!!) and I worked with my SO. Then he said, you donate regularly to the Sandy Hook Promise group. I said yes. He said, how can you be impartial? I said why would I not? He said because you support endangered children. I said and you don't? He then got pissed. LOL! It got heated. I grew up outside of NYC so I speak my mind. He said you can't be impartial. I said yes I can. I can listen to the facts and make my decision. He said no you won't. Then it went back and forth like a game of dodge ball and the judge had to step in and stop us. The judge was telling me he just wants to understand your position. I said I just told him that I am able to be impartial what more does he want from me? Then the judge said, Ok, let's move on to the next person. It was the longest exchange out of all the people in the room. That attorney was such a dick. Of course, I was sent home. Touche! I didn't want to be there anyway.

There's no questioning in Australia. The only thing the lawyers know is your name, address and job. A panel of potential jurors is taken into the court and the charges and witness list is read out. If you know anyone involved you need to publicly raise it with the judge - if it's someone closely involved you'll be dismissed. Then potential jurors can volunteer to discuss it with the judge if they aren't comfortable/able to sit on the jury. Some excuses - like being a victim of a similar crime - will get you off but most excuses don't fly. Then jurors are drawn at random and defence/prosecutors have a set number of challenges they can raise, which they base purely on your job, what you look like or from anything controversial that was discussed with the judge. When I went in for a sexual assault case, the defence challenged every young woman and the prosecution challenged every man in the same age/demographic as the defendant.

In my opinion it's time to do away with jury trials. Even though they are told not to read up on the case, with the Internet so easily accessible I'm sure pretty much every juror "does their own research". Europe does well enough without them.

The only question I have ever gotten is "What is that stench?"

R36, did they ever ask you to spell "trial"? Might've been a disqualifier.

R52, I can see a lawyer preferring gay jury members because they tend to be more detail-oriented and better educated.

You guys have seen Runaway Jury too many times. Yall are putting to much thought into this. They aren't actively seeking gay men. People who are married with children are more likely to get out of jury duty because of family obligations, especially if they have small children. Gay men generally dont have children. And one must be taxpayer to be called for duty.

Both attorneys want unbiased jurors. It's only high profile or murder cases in which some defendants can hire pricey fancy attorneys who do all these psychological profiling on potential jurors.

Size meat verificatia.

I was on a jury in Denver. All we did when we were stuck back in that little room was discuss the mass shootings we'd either been at or the mass shootings we'd been on a jury for.

It was kind of shocking that almost everybody had a story.

[quote] Seems like asking sexual orientation is unnecessarily intrusive. Why would that impact anything?

You wouldn't get asked (during voir dire) about your sexual orientation.

The voir dire or jury selection questions *should* be geared towards removing jurors who cannot be fair and impartial. For example, if it's a child sexual assault trial, the attorneys would probably ask whether you or anyone in your family has been a victim of child sexual assault. If the answer is yes (you've been a victim), they'll ask whether you can be fair or impartial. Usually, the prospective juror would say: No, I can't be impartial. Then, that juror would be excused "for cause."

The other way to eliminate a juror is a "peremptory strike," meaning that you don't have to provide a reason why you don't want that juror. You only get a limited amount of those, and you can't use it to remove all people of a certain race.

I brought my tablet, puzzle book and the group just sat and sat, some watching tv, few women were knitting.

(R68) Excellent explanation, once all selected jurors are selected and assembled the selection for jury foreperson commences, if you exhibit smarts and enunciate clearly, your selected.

I'm going Tuesday. If they ask where I get my news, should I say datalounge?

I served on a criminal case, and all they asked me were standard questions - age, occupation, etc. Then they asked me if I had any knowledge of the case prior to serving and if I thought I could be impartial. That was it. Nothing to fear.

I was interviewed for jury duty and was eliminated because I was too smart. The case was robbery and they thought I might confuse the more stupid jurors and make the case last too long.

R73 Yes, I'm sure that's exactly why you were eliminated. It probably had nothing to do with you being a sociopathic, arrogant prick.

Miss R70 , you couldn't work at least a couple more uses of "select" in your comment?

They’ll want to know how many loads you blow a day.

Spit or swallow

I had a weird experience last time I was on a jury. I filled out the information form honestly, saying that I knew both the victim and the arresting officer socially, that I drove past the crime scene twice a day on my way to and from work, and that I spoke both languages that would be interpreted at the trial (Spanish and Chinese) and that I would listen directly to the witnesses and not the interpreters. Despite those red flags, I ended up on the jury. It seems no one read the forms very closely... One of the interpreters made a very bad mistake, and I had to send a note to the judge about it. The witness had to be recalled and the testimony redone.

R78, defense must have liked you, especially if you knew both the victim and the arresting officer (i.e., 2 witnesses, including the main witness (victim)).

Glad you pointed out the incorrect interpretation. I've always suspected that the court interpretation, generally, is not correct. It's a lot of legal jargon to interpret and I think the interpreters can start to feel sympathetic and want to help a witness, even though that's not the interpreter's job.

Look at you R78 doing your wonderful civic duty

Afraid it wasn't a case of sympathetically helping the witness. The witness was the defendant in a burglary case. He had been seen in the driveway of the victim's house. He said he put his foot up on the rear bumper of the car in order to tie his shoe. But the interpreter messed up the orientation of the car. It had been backed into the driveway, so being at the rear bumper put him next to the house, rather than near the sidewalk (where he claimed he always was). His whole story was that he was walking home at 2 AM, and never left the sidewalk or went near the house...

Look at you, R80, doing your best impression of an asshole...