I informed the judge that I had been at least peripherally involved in the academic controversy over whether people should be allowed to carry concealed firearms. When the judge asked if I would judge the case according to the law rather than according to my own moral beliefs, I replied (truthfully) that I would not. I was dismissed from that case, sent back to be reassigned and, since they apparently didn't need jurors for any other cases at that point, sent home. . . .
Welcome! Follow me on twitter at @johnrlottjr or at https://crimeresearch.org. Please e-mail questions to johnrlott@crimeresearch.org.
Nothing wrong with removing persons for their views on issues or events. During voire dire I was once asked if the fact that the defendant had twice before been convicted of rape of a minor would give rise to a bias against the defendant.
ReplyDeleteThe answer? Yes. I was summarily excused.
Mr. Friedman was very clearly not removed from a jury because of any personal views he had. He was removed because of his answer to the question about whether he would decide a case based on the law.
ReplyDeleteDear 2nd Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteThis is kind of a fine line that you are drawing. He felt strongly enough about the issue that he couldn't ignore his views and decide the issue solely on the base of the law.