• UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    People seem to think that a prior opinion about the dependent automatically means that a potential juror cannot be impartial. All that is required is that the juror can render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial. Plenty of people with strong opinions about Trump himself can still be impartial jurors.

    • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m not sure that’s true. Even a person with a great deal of integrity and respect for the law is going to be biased subconsciously to some extent by the knowledge that this case may change the outcome of a particularly important presidential election. A person whose respect for the law is less than absolute may even consider affecting the outcome of the election to be a moral obligation.

      • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        More autistic people should be jurors. It would be the perfect job for certain autistic people who are very rules based.

        • radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I agree. I am autistic and was a jury foreman about 20 years ago. It was pretty awesome, and I was helping keep the other jurors in line, reminding them when evidence submitted was deemed immaterial and not to be considered in our verdict…all that stuff. 10/10 Would perform my civic duty again (12/10 with rice)

          It would be an honor and a privilege to be on Pissbaby Don’s jury just to have the opportunity to find him guilty, but I’d have to avoid a for cause strike to do so. Thankfully, part of my autistic skill set is that I happen to be a fantastic liar. I don’t lie to people I care about, apart from spinning fantastic tales and then saying, “Naw, I’m just fucking with you. 😏”

          For Joe Schmo, rules-based impartiality. For Republican politicians, self-affirmed white supremacists, shit-stirring talking head bigots, and JK Rowling though, get fucked, here come your god-damned consequences.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Hi government please choose me as juror I definitely will not intentionally give him the maximum sentence

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Yup. And those 10 strikes are for exactly that. If you can’t prove a juror will be biased but suspect they will be, then you can use one of your 10 strikes to exclude them. But you have an unlimited amount of “for cause” strikes, where the juror has admitted that they wouldn’t be able to stay impartial.