The parties have filed their proposed voir dire questions, the questions each party would like potential jurors to be asked when trying to find the jurors who will hear and decide
SCO v. Novell.
Here's
a definition of voir dire, and
here's a very good explanation from ABA of the voir dire process and why some feel voir dire is more important than the trial itself. The article explains that "Prospective jurors may be challenged for cause if they exhibit a bias for or against one of the parties." So the questions are supposed to help the lawyers find out who might harbor a bias. The article also confirms what I've been telling you that juries are remarkably capable, and in fact the article says this:
"Why should anyone think that 12 persons brought in from the street, selected in various ways for their lack of general ability, should have any special capacity to decide controversies between persons," asked formed United States Solicitor General Erwin Griswold. Yet, More often than not, most observers agree that when jurors are left to apply their experiences and common sense to the evidence presented to them, they render as impartial a brand of justice as is humanly possible.
Novell's most interesting question: "20. Do you, or anyone in your family or any of your close friends, work for or inclose contact with the accounting or financial forecasting industry?"
More...
