06-12-2013, 10:32 AM
(06-12-2013, 10:18 AM)Cynical Ninja Wrote:(06-12-2013, 09:31 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Several claim that they haven't formed an opinion.
I have to say I find that more than a little dubious.
This case is so devisive and has been so high profile in the media for so long I can't see how any can't have formed an opinion about yet.
I haven't come across anybody online or IRL who have just shrugged their shoulders and said “I don't know” when asked about the case.
Nobody expects a juror not to have natural life biases or opinions; not on any case. It's not possible.
But, it's very possible for some to be able to put anything they've seen in the media or heard/read from others aside and be objective; considering only the evidence presented at trial when rendering a verdict. Happens in courtrooms across the country every day.
Granted, even if the jurors can be objective, their life experiences and normal human biases (conscious or not) will likely play a part in how each objectively views the same evidence. In fact, attorneys on both sides hope to accurately gauge how potential jurors will lean during jury selection and get a jury that they consider favorable to their side impaneled.
But, juries are very unpredictable and how they interact with each other in deliberations can have an impact on the verdict. It's all part of the human system and the "jury of our peers" aspect.