JURY SELECTION
Blooms across from the San Francisco Superior Courthouse @ 400 McAllister Street
The process of jury selection begins early with the jury questionnaire being collaboratively finalized by the defense and prosecution attorneys alongside the arguments, deliberations, and judgements on motions in limine. The jury questionnaire serves as the initial screening from a broad pool of San Francisco community members solicited to be part of the jury to arrive at the final unbiased 'jury of peers’ in the defendant’s trial. After the jury questionnaires are answered by the selected members of the public and reviewed by the prosecution, defense, and judge; we arrive at 150 potential jurors. There jurors are asked questions by the attorneys and the judge in a series of sessions called the voir dire.
A computer generates a random numbered list, and the voir dire goes in that order. The voir dire starts with jurors 1-12, if neither defense nor prosecution has any objection, that is our jury. If one side objects to a juror, then that person is stricken and replaced by another potential juror. The process continues until both sides stop striking. Each side gets 45 strikes where they don’t have to state a reason. There are unlimited strikes for cause, but you have to convince the judge there is a serious enough concern about fairness.
On the first day of voir dire, one potential juror said he would never vote not guilty because he supports the action 100%. He was stricken from the jury without costing the prosecution one of their strikes. Another potential juror expressed that as a descendant of holocaust survivors, she strongly supported the defendant’s cause and would find it very difficult to find them guilty of a crime. Another potential juror was surprised this was a felony case, and asked the prosecutor “are these being charged as a felony to be more punitive?” The prosecutor did not respond. Many potential jurors expressed a strong belief in civil disobedience and did not want this case to be prosecuted. One said there were so many problems in this city, it didn’t make sense why everyone was here unless someone died. Some jurors were confused when they heard the charges of false imprisonment and heard there was a felony, but then it was just a bridge protest. Unfortunately, the potential jurors who were vocal about their support of Palestine and direct action were stricken by the prosecution. Not all potential jurors supported the action, but San Francisco showed up strong in its support of Palestinian liberation.
On the second day of voir dire the jury questioning continued, eventually leading to the final selection and swearing in of jurors and alternates for the GG26 felony trial. 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.
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 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 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."
Ultimately, 12 jurors were selected and seated along with 5 alternates. The entire finalized panel 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.