Yes.
"You are wrong. The last jury I served on consisted of, in part, a Dr. of Oncology, a community college professor who was also a networking professional, a lawyer, a retired CHP Lieutenant, and myself, a developer/general contractor. Not an idiot in the bunch."
And what was the nature of the trial in question ?
"Defense attorneys do not prefer idiots, but it wouldn't matter if they did, as the prosecutors wouldnt allow it."
Shall I say, they prefer "gullible" idiots. I didn't say the prosecutors like it.
"There is probably a good reason why youve never been selected to serve. But it wasnt because you are too intelligent."
Now, now. That sounds like a personal insult. You know those aren't tolerated on FR, don't you ? :-)
Oh, I get it. You watched the OJ trial. Silly me.
And what was the nature of the trial in question ?
Its not in question. It was a very real part of my life. But I'd like to know...are you attempting to add to your vast knowledge of juries, or are you just curious?
Shall I say, they prefer "gullible" idiots. I didn't say the prosecutors like it.
That sounds an awful lot like backpedaling to me. Someone can be gullible without being an idiot, can they not? And Ive never said you made such a claim of prosecutors...have I? I merely said prosecutors would not allow it because they won't. But you already knew that, being an expert on juries and all.
Now, now. That sounds like a personal insult. You know those aren't tolerated on FR, don't you ? :-)
There's no reason for you to take it that way. What I meant was perhaps they just didn't want a jury expert like you on their jury. Cant say I blame them. :)