Quote

There's a lot of money with a lot of big law firms that have a tremendous amount at stake by getting the right language to convince the right jury that my client is either innocent or that the opposition is guilty.

Jury selection is strictly an emotional process. They're looking for people they can manipulate. Both sides are.

Jurors want courtroom lawyers to have some compassion and be nice.

Every trial lawyer knows what it is like to sit patiently while the other side puts on its case. Inevitably they make a few points that appeal to the jury, and waiting for the opportunity to respond can be painful. The desire to jump up immediately - to point out the flaws in logic or the factual distortions - is often overpowering.

I don't like juries having the wool pulled over their eyes. I don't think that's what the Constitution is about.

Jury instructions are so numerous and complex, it's a wonder jurors ever wade through them. And so it should come as no surprise that they can sometimes get stuck along the way. The instruction on circumstantial evidence is confusing even to lawyers. And reasonable doubt? That's the hardest, most elusive one of all.

When you go into court you are putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.

There is no such thing as an impartial jury because there are no impartial people. There are people that argue on the web for hours about who their favorite character on 'Friends' is.

Believe it or not, there are people who want to be on juries.

A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.