Very cool idea. How hard would it be to process the data in a meaningful way? Are you familiar with the psychology behind it? Is it "standarized" somewhere or rules of thumb that most people agree on with jury selection?
I don't think it would be too difficult. Any question asked or note taken can be analyzed. From whose perspective? Attorneys views on selection is simple; "if they aren't favorable to me get the juror out". They really don't care how or why. It is illegal to select based on race and gender, but it doesn't stop them. (Check recent supreme Court case and batson laws) anything other than that is fair game. Seeming to emotional or smart or attentive or inattentive or rigid or conservative or liberal or religious can get you struck. A lot of it is based off feeling and simple logic.
"I have a complex case, I need smart jurors" or "my case is based off emotions, not facts, so I need emotional jurors" are common thoughts. Because of this any insight into the potential juror is useful.
There is a great deal of rules of thumb. Strategies passed from attorney to attorney, but little verified knowledge. That is what I'm hoping I can provide.
"I have a complex case, I need smart jurors" or "my case is based off emotions, not facts, so I need emotional jurors" are common thoughts. Because of this any insight into the potential juror is useful.
There is a great deal of rules of thumb. Strategies passed from attorney to attorney, but little verified knowledge. That is what I'm hoping I can provide.