How
Voir Dire Ties into the Jury Selection
Leslie
K. Penny
Research
Assignment #4.1
Chancellor
University
Abstract
The following essay incorporates the legal terminology of
Voir Dire into the jury selection
process. A definition is provided as
well as what its used for in the jury selection process, mainly in death
penalty cases. The individuals who
participate in Voir Dire are provided
as well as the type of questions they would ask the jurors. A couple relevant Supreme Court cases are
included in this essay to further bolster the qualifications for potential
jurors for the death penalty.
How
Voir Dire Ties into the Jury Selection
Jury selection consists of finding the right jurors for
the job while following a guideline as to what the judge, prosecution, and
defense are looking for "to ensure
the impartiality of the jury being impaneled" (Schmalleger, 2011, p.
353). The main goal of this essay is to
explain the process for selecting a jury in a death penalty case, what is this
process called, who is involved, what types of questions are asked and by whom,
and one question I would ask as prosecutor in this case and one question I would ask as the defense in this case.
The process in question is called "voir
dire". Voir dire, which is French
meaning "to speak the truth" (Voir Dire, 2012), is "the preliminary examination
of prospective jurors to determine their qualifications and suitability to
serve on a jury, in order to ensure the selection of a fair and impartial
jury" (Voir Dire, 2012), as mentioned above. As our book states, jurors are expected to
be unbiased and free of preconceived notions of guilt or innocence (Schmalleger, 2011).
During the voir dire examinations, challenges for cause,
may arise which means an individual juror cannot be fair or impartial (Schmalleger, 2011). In order to get this point, oral questions,
sometimes supplemented by a prior written questionnaire, conducted by the
judge, the parties, or the attorney's, are used to test the competence of the jurors
without deliberately or unintentionally planting prejudicial material in their
minds (Voir Dire, 2012).
According to Phylis Skloot Bamberger , retired justice of the Supreme
Court of the State of New York, lawyers are given the "opportunity to
question the prospective jurors as to any unexplored matter affecting their
qualifications" and "the role of the court is to prevent questioning
that is repetitious or irrelevant, or questions as to the jurors knowledge of
rules of law" (Bamberger, 2006).
Other items that can cause a juror to be dismissed during voir dire is
"knowledge of the facts, acquaintanceship with the parties, witnesses or
attorneys, occupation which might lead to bias, or previous experiences such as
having been sued in a similar case (Voir Dire, 2012).
If the jury to be selected are for a death penalty case,
the jurors views and opinions are critical regarding capital punishment. In order for a juror to be accepted to serve
on a capital jury, or as this site puts it, (www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org/resources/deathqualification)
"death-qualified", an individual "must be willing to consider
all of the sentencing options and if their opinions would prevent them from
considering any of the sentencing options, then they are not "death
qualified" and are stricken from serving on the jury."
In 1968, the Witherspoon v. Illinois case shows the
Supreme Court claiming "that prospective jurors could not be disqualified
from jury service" due to their voiced objections towards the death
penalty but they can be excluded if they flat out said they would automatically
vote against the death penalty (Death Qualification). In 1985, the Supreme Court changed their procedure
by replacing the death qualification standards of Witherspoon to the standards
of Wainwright v. Witt which gave more discretion to the judge in death
qualification where "the judge decides whether the juror's attitudes
toward the death penalty would prevent or substantially impair their ability to
decide a sentence fairly" (Death Qualification).
If I were the prosecutor I would ask questions in regards
to their views of the death penalty. If
I were the defense I would want to ask to ask the very same question because,
as the defense, it would be in the best interest of my client if the prospective
jurors were against it. As the
prosecutor, I would then ask if they are willing to temporarily set aside their
own beliefs in deference to the rule of law.
To conclude, the information gleaned from this topic
clearly outlines the importance of Voir Dire in death penalty cases. Voir Dire expects potential jurors to be
unbiased and to let go of any preconceived views of guilt or innocence. This writer can see how that can be hard for
many Americans to do but, in the end, the dynamics the jurors must experience
and evaluate are detrimental to the life of the individual on the stand.
Works Cited
Bamberger, P. S. (2006). Jury Voir Dire in Criminal
Cases. NYSBA Journal , 24-29.
Death Qualification. (n.d.).
Retrieved 09 27, 2012, from Capital Punishment in Context: http://www.capitalpunishmentincontext.org/resources/deathqualification
Schmalleger,
F. (2011). Criminal Justice Today: an Introductory Text forthe 21st
Century. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Voir Dire. (2012). Retrieved 09
27, 2012, from The Free Dictionary By Farlex:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Voir+Dire
No comments:
Post a Comment