Over the last twenty-five years, I've picked many juries when trying criminal cases in LA and many other counties and states across the nation.

Obviously, you want to pick a jury that you think would be sympathetic to your client, the theory of your case, and what your case stands for. But the reality is it's very difficult to tell who is going to be sympathetic to your case and who won't. There is a lot of guesswork that goes into picking a jury.

However, if you know what you're doing, have experience, and know the type of juror you want. A lot of the guesswork is eliminated, and you can make educated decisions based on the information you have.

The reality is that, first and foremost, you want to make sure that each juror on the case is fair and has an open mind. If you have a good argument in your criminal case, then you're going to have a chance to win. You don't have a chance to win if you have closed-minded jurors who think that somebody is guilty just because they are charged with a crime.

One of the biggest questions that I ask in voir dire and really go into is: I ask the panel of jurors whether anybody thought that my client was guilty or thinks that my client is guilty just because he's here in court, has a lawyer, and is being charged with serious crimes.

And inevitably, in almost every jury trial that I've done, one or more jurors raise their hands and say that they believe that the client is already guilty. Sometimes, I think it's because they don't want to be on the jury, so they figure if they say stuff like that, they won't be picked, and they can go home.

Other times, I think it's really because they think the person is guilty just because they're charged with a crime, and they're just being honest about it. And it makes sense because the question becomes, why would somebody be charged with a crime if they weren't guilty? This is where the rub is in criminal defense. 

People can be tried for crimes and be completely innocent of them. We hear stories all the time of people being wrongly convicted. I've had many jury trials in which, in the end, the jury found the client not guilty within a very short period because the prosecutor simply didn't have the evidence on the person.

Just because somebody is charged with a crime and has to go through a jury trial doesn't mean they're guilty. The prosecutors have the burden of proof, and if they don't prove it, the defendant should be found not guilty and released.

Who Has To Prove What In A Jury Trial?

The bottom line is that the law and the jury instructions make it very clear that the prosecutors have the burden of proof in a criminal trial. That means that they have to prove each element of whatever crime they've charged a person with beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's a high standard.

Not only do they have to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt in a jury trial in LA, but the defendant also has the presumption of innocence, meaning that the defendant is presumed to be innocent unless the prosecutors can find them guilty.

This is another crucial aspect to emphasize to the jury. It's the defense's responsibility to educate the jurors and correct any misconceptions. If a juror believes the person is guilty simply because they are charged with a crime, they need to be shown that this is not the case. If they had to vote right now before the trial started, they would vote not guilty because the person is presumed innocent.

Another crucial point to drive home in a jury trial in LA is the potential for injustice without the presumption of innocence and the requirement for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Without these safeguards, the system would be open to all kinds of abuse. 

That would mean the police and prosecutors would control everything. Anybody that they arrested and decided that they thought they were guilty would be convicted. And we want something else. This leaves a system subject to manipulation. 

Without the presumption of innocence and the requirement for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the system would be open to all kinds of abuse. Our jury trial system, flawed though it may be, is a great system. It's the best in the world, and it strives to deliver the best and most fair result, most of the time. 

It's not perfect, but it really strives to get the best and most fair result, and I think most of the time, it does.

How Do You Go About Picking A Jury In Los Angeles?

Basically, what you do is bring in about fifty to sixty jurors. Each side typically has about ten peremptory challenges – meaning they can get rid of a juror who they don't think is fair by way of a peremptory challenge, and then once they're done. A peremptory challenge is a right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason. 

They can't do that anymore, so you obviously want to use your peremptory challenges wisely. Randomly, jurors are seated in a jury box of twelve people.

Some judges will add extra chairs and make it about sixteen to eighteen people so that the process can go faster, but those people in the jury box are the ones on the panel unless somebody excuses one of the jurors. 

Once both sides—the prosecution and defense—accept the panel as constituted, that's the jury, and the trial will start. The judge and the clerk of the court will just call jurors randomly. The judge will start the questioning and ask a bunch of questions. The judge's role is to ensure that the jury selection process is fair and impartial. 

Each side can ask the judge questions depending on the type of case. For example, if it's a weapon case, the judge can ask if somebody has issues with guns and gun violence or whether they think they can be fair in a case like that. 

Once the judge is done, most courts usually let each side ask questions or the entire panel, and then they can ask questions of specific jurors depending on their answers.

Once all the jurors are questioned, then the challenges to the jurors start. There can be a challenge for the cause – which basically means that whatever the person said in answer to the questions during the voir dire – whatever the person said they are not going to be a fair juror.

Therefore, they're going to be challenged and excused for cause. A challenge for cause is a request to remove a potential juror because they may be biased or have a conflict of interest. 

Then there are just the peremptory challenges where you're pretty much able to get rid of a juror if you don't think they're going to be fair to your side.

Obviously, as a defense attorney, you want to keep track of who you got rid of and why in case the prosecutors were ever to challenge and say that you're getting rid of jurors because of their race, or because of their gender, or for some other improper reason, and then you can justify why you got rid of that person.

Once each side accepts the panel, the jurors are sworn in, and the trial begins. Then, it goes into opening statements, the evidence is presented, and eventually, there's a closing argument. The jury will deliberate and decide whether the person is guilty or not guilty of each of the charges that they are charged with.