Martin Peterson provided the program at last Wednesday's meeting, describing the art and science of jury selection. Martin is a successful consultant who assists attorneys in developing strategies to determine the biases of potential jurors. Some of his work includes doing focus groups to see how people react to certain questions, which they can possibly ask to the jury pool.
Martin described two high profile cases, which he challenged us to consider how our biases affected our opinions about the cases. One was the McDonald's hot coffee spill in the lap of the plaintiff, which produced third degree burns. At first glance, this could be dismissed as a frivolous lawsuit, but testimony showed that the cups and lids McDonald's used were not rated for the higher than normal coffee temperatures. It was also revealed that McDonald's considered the cost of settling numerous previous spill and scalding cases less expensive and better business than buying more expensive cups that would allow the lid to the cup to remain intact at the higher temperatures, thus avoiding some potential spills. The plaintiff was awarded a significant settlement.
Other interesting observations: Jurors that attorneys like to avoid (by profession): School teachers- especially elementary school- they are more likely to be rule based in their thinking, and less likely to make moral based judgments. Lawyers- they become the leaders of the panel and become a jury of one. Journalists- they may not hear the emotional part of the story. And, people who can't judge because of religious reasons.
