andrel wrote:
> That seems to imply that it is important information that either side 
> rejected someone who might be an expert. So I assume this is information 
> that is not passed on to the final jury.

IME, all the potential jurors are sitting in the room while this goes on. 
It's usually not surprising. Most of the questions are "do you know anyone 
in the room?"   "Has something like this happened to you?"   And so on.

If it's a medical malpractice case involving (say) someone's eyes, and 
prosecution says "Are you a opthamologist?" I don't think it's prejudicial 
to dismiss that guy by either side. Usually the judge will dismiss him 
before it gets to the lawyers.

I.e., the judge asks some questions, and if the judge accepts, the lawyers 
get to ask. Usually the judge will kick out anyone like that first.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no
   CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message