People seem to think that a prior opinion about the dependent automatically means that a potential juror cannot be impartial. All that is required is that the juror can render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial. Plenty of people with strong opinions about Trump himself can still be impartial jurors.
I’m not sure that’s true. Even a person with a great deal of integrity and respect for the law is going to be biased subconsciously to some extent by the knowledge that this case may change the outcome of a particularly important presidential election. A person whose respect for the law is less than absolute may even consider affecting the outcome of the election to be a moral obligation.
I agree. I am autistic and was a jury foreman about 20 years ago. It was pretty awesome, and I was helping keep the other jurors in line, reminding them when evidence submitted was deemed immaterial and not to be considered in our verdict…all that stuff. 10/10 Would perform my civic duty again (12/10 with rice)
It would be an honor and a privilege to be on Pissbaby Don’s jury just to have the opportunity to find him guilty, but I’d have to avoid a for cause strike to do so. Thankfully, part of my autistic skill set is that I happen to be a fantastic liar. I don’t lie to people I care about, apart from spinning fantastic tales and then saying, “Naw, I’m just fucking with you. 😏”
For Joe Schmo, rules-based impartiality. For Republican politicians, self-affirmed white supremacists, shit-stirring talking head bigots, and JK Rowling though, get fucked, here come your god-damned consequences.
People seem to think that a prior opinion about the dependent automatically means that a potential juror cannot be impartial. All that is required is that the juror can render a verdict based solely on the evidence presented at trial. Plenty of people with strong opinions about Trump himself can still be impartial jurors.
I’m not sure that’s true. Even a person with a great deal of integrity and respect for the law is going to be biased subconsciously to some extent by the knowledge that this case may change the outcome of a particularly important presidential election. A person whose respect for the law is less than absolute may even consider affecting the outcome of the election to be a moral obligation.
More autistic people should be jurors. It would be the perfect job for certain autistic people who are very rules based.
I agree. I am autistic and was a jury foreman about 20 years ago. It was pretty awesome, and I was helping keep the other jurors in line, reminding them when evidence submitted was deemed immaterial and not to be considered in our verdict…all that stuff. 10/10 Would perform my civic duty again (12/10 with rice)
It would be an honor and a privilege to be on Pissbaby Don’s jury just to have the opportunity to find him guilty, but I’d have to avoid a for cause strike to do so. Thankfully, part of my autistic skill set is that I happen to be a fantastic liar. I don’t lie to people I care about, apart from spinning fantastic tales and then saying, “Naw, I’m just fucking with you. 😏”
For Joe Schmo, rules-based impartiality. For Republican politicians, self-affirmed white supremacists, shit-stirring talking head bigots, and JK Rowling though, get fucked, here come your god-damned consequences.