If Plato hated Lawyers’ stinking guts, then so do I! Part 2
October 15, 2008The defense lawyer followed up with, “Do you believe there are limits to science?” Mostly everyone shook their heads in agreement or replied with a small yes. A small woman, identifying herself as a chemist looked unsure. She did not believe that there were limits to science, but then the lawyer began his followup questions. He was able to steer her, after some confusion, into agreeing with him that science is fallible. I mean that almost goes without saying, right!
Apparently this game of question-mongering was intended as much to influence the rest of the jury pool as it was to disqualify certain jurors. He continued on.
“Does an objection by the defense predispose you to think that we are hiding something?“ Everyone answered “no”, and I smirked inside, “Of course not!“
After these generalities, the lawyers went on to query specific jurors about their backgrounds and jobs.
I am a student at UCSD.
Blah, blah, blah. What is your major?
I am a classics and philosophy major.
Who is your favorite philosopher?
Plato?
Blah, blah, blah. Why?
He achieved a level of literary grandeur and philosophical insight that moderns have not been able to duplicate.
Wasn’t Plato highly critical of the Sophists?
Yes.*
Let me explain to the members of the Jury who the Sophists were. Blah blah blah.
Cross-questioning by the prosecution.
Mr. Philagon, you won’t hold it against the prosecution or defense that we argue on behalf of our respective sides, will you?
No, in fact, I think the Sophists are unfairly maligned. Recent scholarship has raised the objection in defense of the Sophists that we have very little primary material from the Sophists themselves.**
Ten minutes later.
The prosecution excuses Mr. Philagon from the jury.
*Let the record show that a lawyer himself initiated the parallels between ancient sophists and modern lawyers, not I.
**Perhaps a little too desperate here to show that I want to be included on the jury.
In the jury selection process, we always forget that lawyers already have a preset notion of what kind of juror they’re looking for. This is true for all selections.
We know what we want, now we’re just trying to find someone who fits into that.
Evidently in this action, they did not wish to have someone who was smart enough to confuse the rest of the jury. And let’s be honest here, I’ve been witness to many a jury selection and jury trial and the people who make up a large part of the panel are morons. They are swayed by fiery rants instead of pure methodical logic.
In short, you probably didn’t get picked because you seemed too knowledgeable. And that’s sad.
And if an attorney can steer you from your opinion, it wasn’t that strong to begin with. *pats little chemist lady*
Their job is to persuade, and god forbid they get a juror who isn’t easily swayed.
We recently featured your blog on our website. We would love for you to log on and check it out. You can find the post at: http://www.collegewikis.com/ucsd/groups/all/topics/top-ucsd-blogs. As always feel free to edit and comment!