Maryland trial voir dire will be featured on Everyday Law

Bob Clark and Everyday Law will have the privilege of speaking with Maryland attorney David Harak on his heroic quest to both expand the rights of attorneys to conduct voir dire of prospective jurors at trial and to increase the scope of voir dire generally.

For those who are unfamiliar with the process of voir dire, it is the mechanism whereby attorneys ascertain whether jurors have biases or experiences which should preclude them from jury service in particular cases. This determination is made presently through questions submitted by the trial attorneys to the presiding judge, who then asks the jurors the questions the judge feels are germane to the case and possible bias.

The problem with this system is twofold. First, the judge only has cursory knowledge about the case and parties before them and may not appreciate lines of potential juror bias.

Second, judges always have an incentive to " move things along" and often feel that genuine detailed inquiry about juror life experiences or biases is not warranted.

Having tried quite a number of jury trials and spoken to the jurors afterwards, I can say without a doubt that judges rarely tease out the full extent of biases and life experiences that would likely effect the ability of jurors to fairly deliberate and decide cases.

Dave's tireless efforts championing the rights of all litigants to get a truly fair trial are admirable.

 

 

 

 

Robert V. Clark
Maryland Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyer
Post A Comment