[throwaway17_17]

The belief by a juror that law enforcement personnel, especially phrased as a belief that applies to law enforcement personnel as a generic group, is a well established basis for a challenge for cause leading to exclusion of that person from being a juror. The US jury system is build explicitly on excluding these types of belief in juries in order to ensure fairness, impartiality, and individual and case/witness specificity of “triers-of-fact”.

I could understand someone who disagrees with it, but your position would be antithetical to current and historical thought on what defines a fair jury.

[PopAlongKid]

>The belief by a juror that law enforcement personnel,

>excluding these types of belief

You have not stated what belief you are talking about.

[throwaway17_17]

True, apparently I got backspace happy when Inposted the reply on mobile. I was talking about the belief by a perspective juror that law enforcement personnel are more credible or trustworthy than others due to their status as law enforcement personnel.

[spolitry]

This is not quite true. The rules of evidence state that law enforcement (official) testimony is more credible than civilian testimony. Officials have a wide exemption from hearsay objections, if the offfical was working at an official task at the time.