On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:19:11 +0100, andrel wrote:

> On 25-3-2009 22:48, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:26:37 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>> 
>> In order to get through the vetting process, both sides would have to
>> think they had strong enough evidence to convince the expert they were
>> correct.  That's going to be a pretty rare occurrence - and you can't
>> really get to know someone's full depth of experience during voir dire,
>> either - it's not a long process.
> 
> 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.

Rejected someone as an expert *on the jury*.  Expert witnesses are an 
entirely different matter.

Jim

Post a reply to this message