The problem with Trump is that he’s a known quantity to anyone who has lived on Earth for the last 50 years. He’s a compulsive liar, literally about everything and a vile, disgusting person, as well.
Knowing that, I would find it impossible to “just consider the facts” and believe that maybe . . . just maybe, this is the one time he’s telling the truth.
mySFWaccount@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
How does the court system evaluate that? That seems like a super hard thing to check.
fubo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Jury selection usually involves asking the prospective jurors various questions, with the lawyers on each side being allowed to dismiss jurors they think will be biased.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
jury selection is a very tedious process where every juror is interviewed by the judge and possibly both sides. They get whittled down by the court before being fully assigned, and then the prosecution and defense get to boot a certain number of jurors.
advising on jury selection is actually very lucrative business with both sides dishing out massive amounts of cash to make those checks.
in any case, in this situation, it’s not that they’re looking for unbiased jurors, it’s that they’re looking to balance out the biases of the individual jurors with jurors of apposing bias. I mean, you’d have to be living under a rock at this point to not have a bias as far as trump is concerned.
DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
You can’t just balance out the bias though.
If one juror just plain will not return a guilty or not guilty verdict, then the whole trial is for naught.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Pretty sure it’s a hung jury and they do it again (or bring in an alternate that’s been in the trial watching every thing as well.)
You’re right it’s a problem. Would you prefer trial by combat?
twistypencil@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Voir dire is the process, if you lie you go to jail