That’s not how jury selection works, though. They find people, filter some out, bring in the alternates, filter them out, and repeat until they have 12 they’re happy with.
They will try, but people will answer that murder is not acceptable and then find not guilty later anyway. And they can potentially do that truthfully. If they find small issues with the evidence, they can go with not guilty.
You are correct. That’s why I said specifically not accounting for filtering from the jury selection questionnaire, when extrapolating the ABC poll to statistics for a hypothetical 12-person jury. Of course the actual jury is not selected once and entirely randomly, but I was hoping to provide an interesting statistic.
That’s not how jury selection works, though. They find people, filter some out, bring in the alternates, filter them out, and repeat until they have 12 they’re happy with.
They will try, but people will answer that murder is not acceptable and then find not guilty later anyway. And they can potentially do that truthfully. If they find small issues with the evidence, they can go with not guilty.
You are correct. That’s why I said specifically not accounting for filtering from the jury selection questionnaire, when extrapolating the ABC poll to statistics for a hypothetical 12-person jury. Of course the actual jury is not selected once and entirely randomly, but I was hoping to provide an interesting statistic.
The defense gets to weed them out too, and I feel like less sympathetic jurors would be quite “obvious”