None of what you said is true. I know what you mean, and it’s a good worry, but juries are not purely “random”.
They are heavily scrutinized and thoroughly checked from both sides. A large group of potentials are brought together (randomly) and a selection process takes place. Both sides form written questions of the potential jurors to ensure they aren’t a shoe in for the other side. Those questions are provided to a judge who validates that they are not bad. Then the questions are provided to the individuals to answer with the judges guidance. Then they are selected to serve or be alternates by all three parties. Yes trumps lawyers will be there and have a say but it can be countermanded by the other side and the judge focuses on the meat of the items.
In trump’s case the pool will be very large and the judge will be spending a very long time talking to each to ensure they will be impartial and fair. Above and beyond the simple questionnaire. They also have the capacity to double check for obvious issues like lying about their belief structure and the judge sets out the requirements for the case.
The judge 100% talks to the jurors directly and in general tries to engender a level of trust between themselves and the potential jurors. They will ensure neutrality.
Yes it could go sideways, but it is unlikely. The politics are so unbelievably polarizing it would be hard to imagine a juror lying through their teeth to get into there with the risk of being found to have lied through the process. And seriously lying on the juror question forms is… bad. Really bad.
Btw lawsuits end in a settlement because the cost of the lawsuit is higher than the cost of settling and getting money now. Nothing more or less. You are conflating very different processes.
Be angry about the right things with the right information. It’s way more healthy and will help you energize others.
None of what you said is true. I know what you mean, and it’s a good worry, but juries are not purely “random”.
They are heavily scrutinized and thoroughly checked from both sides. A large group of potentials are brought together (randomly) and a selection process takes place. Both sides form written questions of the potential jurors to ensure they aren’t a shoe in for the other side. Those questions are provided to a judge who validates that they are not bad. Then the questions are provided to the individuals to answer with the judges guidance. Then they are selected to serve or be alternates by all three parties. Yes trumps lawyers will be there and have a say but it can be countermanded by the other side and the judge focuses on the meat of the items.
In trump’s case the pool will be very large and the judge will be spending a very long time talking to each to ensure they will be impartial and fair. Above and beyond the simple questionnaire. They also have the capacity to double check for obvious issues like lying about their belief structure and the judge sets out the requirements for the case.
The judge 100% talks to the jurors directly and in general tries to engender a level of trust between themselves and the potential jurors. They will ensure neutrality.
Yes it could go sideways, but it is unlikely. The politics are so unbelievably polarizing it would be hard to imagine a juror lying through their teeth to get into there with the risk of being found to have lied through the process. And seriously lying on the juror question forms is… bad. Really bad.
Btw lawsuits end in a settlement because the cost of the lawsuit is higher than the cost of settling and getting money now. Nothing more or less. You are conflating very different processes.
Be angry about the right things with the right information. It’s way more healthy and will help you energize others.