Occasionally i like to read nonfiction books which add to my awareness that American 'justice' is rotten to the core. I'm reading one such book now: THE TRIALS OF WALTER OGROD and just came across something so juicy i'd like to share it with u. This is from p.183-184 which quotes extensively from a 1986 training video tape shown to young prosecutors in Philadelphia to train them in the process of 'voir dire' or jury selection. I'm editing it a little for the sake of brevity and clarity.
"the case law says that the object of getting a jury is to get - i had to look this up because i didn't know this was the purpose of a jury - a 'competent, fair, and impartial jury'... Well, that's ridiculous. You're not going to get that... And if any one of u think u're going to be some noble civil libertarian and try to get (fair) jurors, that's ridiculous. U'll lose and be out of office... The only way u're going to do your best is to get jurors that are as unfair and more likely to convict than anyone in that room."
"The ideal juror from the Commonwealth's standpoint ... would be willing to hang his own mother... take solid, well-dressed citizens from strong families, people who read simple books instead of Karl Marx. Never take a lawyer or a law student, never take a social worker, don't take a teacher, they're too liberal, unless maybe it's a white teacher from a mostly black school who is fed up with black teenagers. Never take Quakers, they need too much evidence. Blacks from low income areas are less likely to convict, so u don't want "those people" on your jury; it may look like u're being racist, but u're just being realistic..."
"most of all, keep smart people off the jury... Smart people will analyze the hell out of your case... They hold u to a higher standard... They take those words 'reasonable doubt' and they actually try to think about them. You want people to come in there and say, 'Yep, she said he did it, he did it'".
No comments:
Post a Comment