Jury Voir Dire Day 2
Process
Today was the continuation of jury questioning, selection and swearing in of jurors and alternates. Both prosecution and defense vetted the prospective jurors on bias related to Palestinian solidarity, beliefs related to public protest, attentiveness, willingness to ask for clarification, and ability to follow instructions.
The court moved at a rapid pace, especially when the judge gave defense a questioning time of just 16 minutes. After an early break, several jurors (15, 19 and 20) were excused, prompting a reshuffle of the seats. Ultimately, 12 jurors were selected and seated along with 5 alternates. The entire finalized panel has agreed to accept the presumption of innocence and deliver a fair trial.
Once sworn in, the Judge issued three strict baseline rules to support the validity of the trial:
No outside research: Jurors are forbidden from looking up the case, news updates or outside research to facts related to the case
No Discussion: Jurors will not talk about the case with anyone outside of official deliberations.
Open minds: No one is to form a final opinion or make up their mind until all evidence has been presented and the selected group of jurors enter official deliberations.
Highlights
One prospective Juror stated: “We believe this is not a reality, but merely a simulation” later added “didn’t think he could return a verdict of guilty. Would always see the defendants as innocent. “They were doing something for people that were less fortunate so I would always see them as innocent” They were excused.
Another potential juror (Juror 18) shared that he is Jewish, pro-Israel, and has been on Birthright, admitting it would be personally difficult to hear arguments that Israel is committing a genocide; though he felt he could try to look at the case through “another lens.”
A juror who was ultimately selected (Juror 22) shared that they participate in "human banner" protests down at the beach. When asked how they feel when protests impact people, shrugged it off, saying, “We are inconvenienced every day of our lives, you just have to roll with it."
DETAILED NOTES ON IN-COURT PROCEEDINGS
Prosecutor Watson questioning:
Juror 12: “We believe this is not a reality, but merely a simulation”
Juror 14: Believes there are more important cases.
Watson: are you going to hold it against The People or the 7 Defendants?
14: No. Believes there should only be proscecution when there is harm or violence. Can’t be impartial.
Juror 16: Has a big presentation coming up, a trial would be distracting. Could he be impartial - he said yes but he thinks it would compromise his ability to pay attention and it would be stressful for him. Has family in law enforcement.
Juror 17: Is a pastor. Agrees we all have prejudice. Agrees with Watson that empathy is part of the job.
Watson: can you put sympathy you have aside and be impartial
17: I answered this question yesterday. would follow the guidance of the judge and the law and feels ready and sophisticated to handle what the trial might bring
Juror 13: Watson - you said yesterday you might have decision paralysis deciding someone’s fate. How would you get yourself to make a decision
13: doesn’t know, but thinks she could do it.
Watson: do you feel comfortable finding someone guilty no knowing what the sentencing could be
13: hesitant, this would always be at least in the back of my mind
Juror 24: can put biases aside
Had more time to think from being questioned yesterday and feels she could be impartial.
Doesn’t think pro Palestinian protestors should be punished for dissenting? (note-taker unsure of exact sentiment)
Watson: these are deeply held beliefs?
24: yes, but I feel confident I can set those aside
Juror 21: believes in 1st amendment but can follow judge’s instructions
Believes she could return a guilty verdict
Really believes in first amendment. Thinks she could set aside her thoughts on protesting and looks at facts in case and follow instructions
Judge questions and responses from the jurors:
Juror 12: didn’t think he could return a verdict of guilty. Would always see the defendants as innocent. “They were doing something for people that were less fortunate so I would always see them as innocent”
Juror 13: Judge asked if they can do the job of being a juror? Its a hard job, it’s an important job. Juror responded affirmatively.
Juror 14: feels protesting is ok even when it’s an inconvenience. But still feels he can be impartial and fair.
Judge asks Juror 14 if they will give both sides a fair trial? The juror responded, yes.
After a short break jurors 15, 19, and 20 were excused
Reshuffled the seats
Defense excused juror 7
Prosecution excuses reshuffled juror 7
Two more jurors were excused.
12 jurors have officially been picked - now filing 5 alternatives.
Judge: can any of the new people in new seats prevent you from being fair and impartial? Set aside any biases etc.
Everyone agreed
Judge: Defendants presumed to be innocent, the burden falls on the prosecution to prove them guilty. Does anyone disagree or think this would be hard for them to do?
17 only one that raised hand: thinks there are at least some charges he would definitely find guilty
Judge: Do you feel you could put aside what you have read, and follow
17: if what i heard isn’t true i could. I will do my best. I have my biases.
Judge only giving 16 minutes for defense questioning.
Attorney Johns: Hates mushrooms and so therefore couldn’t judge a pizza eating contest with mushrooms, she wouldn’t be able to be fair in that contest.
Juror 17: bridge was closed, and thinks this is a crime, its criminal
Attorney Johns: would anything change your mind legal wise
Juror 17: if i learned these acts weren’t criminal, then ya i could change my mind. If its clear they didn’t break the law, i would find them not guilty
To Juror 18: Attorney Johns asks - is there anything you’ve heard that makes you feel like you couldn’t be a good juror?
Juror 18: no. Pro-israel, jewish, has been on birthright. It would be hard to hear Israel is committing a genocide
Attorney Johns: would you have a hard time treating those defendants fairly?
Juror 18: No, i would be able to look at it through someone else’s lenses
Attorney Johns: if you are looking at folks that are pro-Palestinian, can you hear them, evaluate their credibility, and see them fairly
Juror 18: As long as I know the rules, I think I could judge fairly
Juror 20: More understanding of Palestinian cause. Thinks she could hear the facts and be fair.
Attorney Johns: would you hold prosecution to a higher burden?
Juror 20: No
Juror 20: thinks she could be impartial, and separate the fact that it’s about the protest from the law
Attorney Johns to Juror 19: Anything about the methods, or content of protest, or conflict of Israel/Palestine that would affect you to serve as an impartial juror?
Juror 19: No
Attorney Johns to Juror 21: Anything about the methods, or content of protest, or conflict of Israel/Palestine that would affect you to serve as an impartial juror?
Juror 21: no. Sympathetic to cause of protestors but thinks that wouldn’t cause impartiality. And having family in military wouldn’t affect this either.
Attorney Johns to Juror 22: Anything about the methods, or content of protest, or conflict of Israel/Palestine that would affect you to serve as an impartial juror?
Juror 22: No
Attorney Johns: You have served on jury before, anything you didn’t like about it?
Juror 22: No
Attorney Johns: Any feelings about where and when protests should occur?
Juror 22: no, does a human banner down on beach, Doesn’t have any feelings on where/when that should happen.
Attorney Johns: If your beach protest did impact ppl, do you have a feeling on that?
Juror 22: I don’t have a feeling on that. We are inconvenienced every day of our lives, you just have to roll with it. It happens.”There’s nothing I can do about it”
Attorney Johns to Juror 23: Anything that gives you pause today?
Juror 23: Doesn’t think she is the right person, doesn’t understand a lot of the vocabulary. And nervous to mess up if she doesn’t fully understand. Answering the questionnaire was hard for her. Doesn’t follow Israel/Palestine news but went home and looked up more about whats going on over there.
Juror 24: Thinks she could be impartial even with strong political feelings. Feels confident she can separate her opinion from facts of the case
Prosecution Roze questions:
Roze to 20: You don’t think protestors should be charged right (on questionnaire)?
20: Yes. After hearing more about what is asked of her as a juror, she can separate the two (facts and feelings?)
20: Assuming they are innocent right now, but if she can be convinced that they are guilty (from Roze’s question)
24: On social media and see’s protests and bridges being shut down for political reasons. Thought it was in reference to a side show on the bridge
PR: Can you follow the instruction to not look this case up
24: Can’t dictate IG algorithm, but can avoid it if it comes up
PR: Would the consequence of a verdict weigh on you?
24: Could separate facts from feelings. Feels confident she could navigate this, and biases because she does this for work.
22: Having a hard time hearing. Missing about 10% of convo. It might actually be that I’m thinking about something else. I can really tune everybody out. It might be more concentration. It happens, my mind wanders. My wife tells me I don’t listen.
Judge to 17: Can you be impartial?
17: yes
Judge to 23: If there’s something you don’t understand, do you feel comfortable raising your hand for clarification?
23: Yes
13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 24 excused
15, 19,21, 22, 23 are alternates
Jury is sworn in
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY:
Don’t do research on case
Don’t talk about facts of case with anyone
Don’t make up your mind until after you have discussed with your fellow jurors