Replies

Simply having worked with a witness is not a basis for an automatic disqualification. And no one said anything about "objecting to every juror."

You simply refuse to accept the undeniable fact that they WANTED this guy on the jury. There was no proliferation of strikes for cause. They didn't get to any point where anyone would think that the judge would 'shut them down.' They were told all this stuff, and they didn't challenge the guy for cause. Period. You may not like it, but it isn't anyone else's fault. They wanted him, and they got him.

80 posted on 03/07/2007 9:39:04 AM PST by lugsoul (Livin' in fear is just another way of dying before your time. - Mike Cooley)

Simply having worked with a witness is not a basis for an automatic disqualification.

But you said it was. You said they could have simply objected for cause and that was that. Which is it?

They didn't want him on the jury. It was clear they were grilling him (see the linked Slate article) and decided to give up since he was saying all the right things.

83 posted on 03/07/2007 9:42:16 AM PST by AmishDude (It doesn't matter whom you vote for. It matters who takes office.)