You’re about to begin a major trial, and one of the most critical aspects of it: jury selection. The obligations of zealous representation require you to obtain the best jury for your client you can, which in turn requires you to research, identify and analyze pertinent information about potential jurors. This allows more informed judgments regarding potential bias and hidden agendas, potential reaction to trial theories, and accuracy of voir dire answers, thus more easily substantiating cause strikes.
In today’s world of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and their “friends”—itself a term which has lost all meaning—the volume of information people have affirmatively posted online about themselves is mind-boggling. Can these reservoirs be tapped when the posters become potential jurors? And to what extent does such research run up against another bedrock ethical obligation—the prohibition against counsel communicating with potential or selected jurors?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
