r/nottheonion • u/ArgentineBeauty • 19h ago

Reese Witherspoon Chosen as Jury Foreman After Jurors Thought She Went to Law School Because of Legally Blonde

https://www.fashiontimes.co.uk/reese-witherspoon-jury-duty-mix-1763528
25.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

117

u/TBSchemer 18h ago

They always screen me out as soon as they hear I have a PhD.

You probably know this better than I do, but I believe lawyers deliberately try to craft a jury full of uneducated rubes who are easily manipulated.

57

u/Yubat 18h ago

[u/SpockShotFirst](u/SpockShotFirst) explains it well, but I’ll add that attorneys generally want the case decided based on what they present and argue. They want narrative control. Those who bring relevant outside expertise add a new variable that the neither side can easily predict or control, so easier to dump that person than take on additional risk. Does that mean a higher level of rubes in the jury sometimes? It certainly can.

9

u/bullitt-rider 14h ago

Agree to a point but I've had cases where the jury dynamic isn't as described... God forbid there be any large sporting events or TV series ending...

When the judge has to give strict directions on things like 'wearing a thong does not equate to consent' you do have to question if that's predictable and controllable or unsuitable

1

u/gsfgf 4h ago

the judge has to give strict directions on things like 'wearing a thong does not equate to consent'

because that's incredibly important.

2

u/bullitt-rider 1h ago

Yes clearly and it shouldn't have to be answered with note.

75

u/SpockShotFirst 18h ago

Both sides can cut jurors. If one side benefits from educated jurors, the other side will try to keep them out. So it isn't that lawyers, as a monolith, "deliberately try to craft a jury full of uneducated rubes." It's just that chances are high that at least one side is counting on that strategy.

26

u/ApprehensivePop9036 16h ago

"the problem with this case is you'd need to be a total idiot to accept these arguments from our side."

"We'll handle that in voir dire"

20

u/forrealthoughcomix_ 18h ago

Damn. And here I am wanting to sit on a jury as an educated rube who is easily manipulated :(

17

u/jrzalman 17h ago

I always hear this, usually like your story posted in a self-congratulatory way, but never really experienced it. I've been on like eight juries and get picked every time. I tell them I'm an aerospace engineer, answer all their questions well and always get picked.

Probably depends on the case but I think many lawyers are looking for jurors that can understand their arguments.

5

u/TBSchemer 17h ago

That's interesting. 3 times already, I was dismissed immediately after the question of "what's your highest level of education?"

8

u/jrzalman 17h ago

Might be demographics or age combined with education? Hard to say. I was on a murder trial last year and one of my fellow jurors was lawyer (non-criminal case work) and they let her through. The case itself was fairly involved and had lots of twists and turns.

Likely a lot of variation in what lawyers are looking for from case to case but what I have learned is they are looking for me. I have never been excused. I always volunteer to be foreman and get us out of there in a day or two.

2

u/TBSchemer 15h ago edited 14h ago

Yeah, being a white male probably gives me 2 strikes, and then add a PhD into the mix and I'm out.

Come to think of it, for one of my 3 dismissals, we didn't even get to the education question. I literally just sat down in the booth, no questions asked, and someone said, "jurors 3, 4, 8, and 11, you may leave." Checked my number, and I was 11.

I remember thinking, "maybe you could just let me send a photo in the mail, so I don't have to get up and drive here next time."

1

u/gsfgf 4h ago

Also location. If you're Berkley, everyone's gonna have a handful of degrees. If you're in Hahira, Georgia, and a PhD comes through the door, you ain't playin' that game.

7

u/newenglandpolarbear 18h ago

That's pretty much exactly it. Either that or they try to fill the jury with people they think will be sympathetic to their case. Both sides can do it.

5

u/CharlieKelly_Esq 15h ago

Many times attorneys want reasonable people or a person with an average/normal level of rational. When a person possesses a higher education degree, it can signal a person that is hyper rational. In some ways it could seem like this would be better for the jury, but without explicit jury instructions being given, a juror might not realize that what they require to be convinced is too much.

3

u/bicycle_mice 16h ago

I have a doctorate (NP) and have been selected for a jury.

2

u/Radiant_Jedi 16h ago

I have had similar experiences where I get cut once they find out that I'm a professor of rhetoric and composition. They don't seem to like that I fully understand about things like standards of evidence, pathos appeals, etc.

1

u/gsfgf 4h ago

Nope. We don't want people who are going to mistakenly think expertise in some other field has a damn thing to do with being a juror. Basically, we think you'll be bad at it.

1

u/TBSchemer 3h ago

Really? Because I thought being a competent juror is about being willing to suspend assumptions and follow evidence and logic to their reasonable conclusions, which is the key skill PhDs are specifically trained in.

Except when law clearly tramples morality, in which case jury nullification becomes the mandate.

You might be thinking of Masters degrees, which are awarded merely for "expertise in some other field."