What Are Three Examples Of Accompanying Juror Attitudes?

#18 –– What are five “maxims” believed by many attorneys about juror characteristics and accompanying juror attitudes? During the stage of jury selection, attorneys have the opportunity to remove specific jurors that they believe may possess prejudicial attitudes that may negatively effect their goal regarding the outcome of the case. There are specific subjects that attorneys can touch upon when asking their potential jurors questions that may or may not reflect their attitudes of topics similar to their case. Examples of topics addressed include: media contact, knowledge of the defendants and their case, trust in the government, spare time activities, organizational memberships, opinion on war/conflicts, and other issues that are potentially related to the trial.
For instance, if a prosecutor were to ask a particular juror how they feel about the government and the juror immediately responds by saying how he/she is distrustful of policy-makers overall intentions for the well being of society, the prosecutor is more likely to remove this juror because of the fact that they are more likely to be distrustful of the criminal justice system and thus, are more likely to take the side of the defense at the conclusion of the hearing. On the contrary, if the juror were to explain that he/she were indifferent or had no opinion of the government and its intentions, then the prosecutor probably would refrain from removing that specific juror. The strategy behind this process is important because each attorney ultimately has a goal to represent either the defendant or the state in the best possible manner. As a result, both attorneys desire to obtain jurors who will be more sympathetic to their side of the