db2@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
The whole jury would have to be made up of CEOs to achieve that. Any lawyer, even the worst one, could argue that they aren’t his peers making the selection invalid.
Here’s a question: how many people making more than $200,000/year or who are independently wealthy actually serve on a jury?
I ask this because every jury pool I’ve been in was made up of working class people. Those too poor don’t vote and so aren’t on their lists, and those too rich always seem to have acceptable reasons to be excused, if they’re ever pooled in the first place.
it was actually reverse here in the west, recently i sat in a jury pool, they chose mostly the 100-200k/year people, they knew they had the most FREE TIME. the ones that dint have actual potential biases or a language barrier, like being a lawyer from germany, knowing law enforcement or dealt with them, or somehting similar to the defendant.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 hours ago
they just need some boomers or a rich jurors to achieve the same thing as a jury pool for ceos would.
they also would need to find 3-6 alternate jurors too, so its actually 18 jurors, just in case 1 of the 12 is too biased. i sat in vore dire in sept for juror selection, there was initially 100-200ppl before vore dire, they managed to reduce it o less than 60 by the next day, and then half that after that. they will spend 1 or several days of questioning each potential juror(it takes the whole day).
In a high profile case like this, vore dire would likely go on for more than a week, if not longer.
and most people around me are into tech so high income earners(only a few of us are not that well off), they know which ones will be okay to be in the juror(you guessed it the tech people).
theres a probably they will choose older people 55+ but not too old like 70, since htey are automatically excused from jury duty.