David Harak is one of Maryland's preemienent trial lawyers and he has a pet peeve, voir dire. Voir dire is the process whereby jurors are selected for trial participation.
Traditionally, in Maryland, lawyers in circuit court jury trials submit written questions to the presiding trial judge who then determines which such questions will be asked. Often the actual trial lawyers who know the case facts intimately, disagree with the judge as to what questions might be hypothetically of value to tease out possible biases of potential jurors.
Frankly many trial judges feel pressure to complete their dockets inlcuding trials and are hesitant to probe very far into what animates and motivates jurors. As a consequence Maryland limits voir dire more than virtually anywhere in the United States.
This author has tussled with trial judges for decades about what information needs to be explored and now Dave Harak has shepherded a voir dire pilot program to multiple counties in Maryland.
What this means is that rather than the trial judge choosing which questions can be asked of possible jurors, now the actual trial lawyers will do so, This inevitably will result in lawyers drilling down further on jury pool responses that are shall we say..equivocal?
Any trial lawyer who has attended a national trial seminar knows that much time and emphasis is placed on asking the prospective jurors the right questions in the right mannner so as to elicit meaningful responses. Every Maryland lawyer ever has skipped this seminar topic as unnecessary due to the complete absence of useful voir dire in Maryland.
Because if David Harak and his mates this will no longer be the case!
Fairer trials will become the norm and all will be right with the world!
