Comments on: BP explosion trial: the uses of voir dire

By: MF

MF — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:56:32 +0000

Oops, my second paragraph should have been ‘defense’ lawyer, not ‘plaintiffs’. I think you got the idea, though…

By: MF

MF — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:18:51 +0000

IANAL or a judge or in any way in the legal field, but if I were judge, I would have stopped the display of the image immediately and warned counsel that if he tried a similar stunt, he would immediately be held in contempt of court.

As for the “how many have heard of frivolous lawsuits” question, as a plaintiffs lawyer I would have objected, and as a judge I would sustain and not allow the dismissal of any jurist who responded to the question. Merely being familiar with the concept does not in any way prove a potential jurist is incapable of deciding fairly. If the defense lawyer wants to use one of his peremptory challenges, that’s his choice. But the jurist would not be dismissed for cause.

OK, I may have the terms wrong and I might not even have a legal leg to stand on, but boy, guys like the hypothetical defense lawyer in reply #1 sure do earn their “scum of the earth” nickname.

By: Coondog

Coondog — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:06:31 +0000

The defense might have displayed Brent Coon's MySpace page behind them as a counterweight. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=33991335 No, that's not embarrassing at all. At Age 47. Would you call that a Pamela Anderson obsession?

By: kat

kat — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:09:14 +0000

I don’t understand why the judge allowed things to be shown to the jury during voir dire at all without a prior consultation and agreement between counsel.

By: Anonymous Attorney

Anonymous Attorney — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 10:06:59 +0000

The proprietors of this site, and non-lawyer observer-readers, may be interested to know “from the trenches” that a popular voir dire question these days from plaintiff’s attorneys goes as follows:

“Now, how many of you have heard of this whole ‘frivolous lawsuits’ thing?”

Anyone who raises their hand is kicked out of the pool. Anyone who agrees that “there are too many lawsuits” is sent packing. Etc. It’s a pretty effective and efficient way of weeding out skeptical jurors or defense-oriented jurors. Sometimes a plaintiff’s lawyer might “draw the sting” as we say in trial practice, nodding that yes, there are some nutty lawsuits – but not mine, hoo boy. “Do you believe that when a person is seriously injured – their life ruined – by the negligence of another, that they are entitled to just and fair compensation?”

Who can answer no?