Imagine that you have been summoned for jury duty in the United States. If you are selected to be on the jury, you will be hearing a rape case where a 23-year-old female alleges sexual assault. In order to select the jury (a process known by the Latin term voir dire), both the prosecutor and defense attorney question the jury pool to identify and dismiss for cause people who have strong opinions about the subject matter, who already know about the case, or who may be biased for or against either party to the trial. Attorneys may also dismiss members of the jury pool who they think will not be favorable to their case. These types of dismissals are called peremptory challenges and the attorneys have a limited number of them. During the process of jury selection, you notice the prosecutors are using their limited peremptory challenges to dismiss most of the young women from the jury pool. You find this peculiar, given that young women would seem to be most favorable to the prosecution’s case.
Assignment:
Submit 1–2 pages, not including title page and reference page:
Informed by social psychology theory, explain why the prosecutor was reluctant to seat young women on the jury. Please provide a detailed explanation for this seemingly odd behavior.
——–
Assume you’ve been called to serve on a jury in the United States. If you’re chosen for the jury, you’ll be hearing a rape case in which a 23-year-old woman claims sexual assault. Both the prosecutor and the defense counsel interrogate the jury pool to identify and dismiss for cause those who have strong ideas about the subject matter, who already know about the case, or who may be prejudiced for or against either side to the trial (a practice known in Latin as voir dire). Attorneys may also exclude jurors from the pool if they believe they would be unfavorable to their cause. Peremptory challenges are the legal term for these types of dismissals, and the attorneys who file them are known as peremptory challengers.
