At a time when trust in institutions is at an all-time low,
Americans still seem to have faith in their fellow citizens serving on juries.
Nearly
60 percent of Americans say they have at least a fair
amount of trust in juries, according to a new survey — higher than for any
other group in the judicial system.
اضافة اعلان
But that trust may soon be put to the test, as former
President Donald Trump appears to be headed for multiple trials in the coming
year.
When asked specifically about Trump’s upcoming trials, a
majority of
Americans — Democrats, Republicans, and independents — said they
did not think the courts would be able to seat impartial jurors.
And those jurors will, no doubt, face intense scrutiny,
which for many is reason enough to not want to serve. In fact, a majority of
Americans said they were not personally interested in serving on a
jury for Trump.
If you’re sitting on a jury, even for a day or two, you get a window into a very serious and focused environment,
The study, conducted in July by the polling firm Ipsos,
focused on Americans who have served on a jury at some point in the last 10
years, providing a portrait of the type of American who serves and a rare
window into the thoughts of the kinds of people who may decide Trump’s fate.
It found that jurors were far more likely than the general
public to trust those in the criminal justice system, such as judges at the
federal, state, and Supreme Court level, attorneys, nonlegal staff members and
law enforcement.
The demographics of those who have served also differ
notably from those of the general public. They are more likely to be older,
wealthier, and more educated. Two-thirds of those who have served on a jury are
over 50, compared with less than half of the general public. Former jurors skew
slightly more
Democratic than all Americans, and men are more likely than women
to have served.
But it appeared that the elevated levels of trust in the
judicial system displayed by former jurors (the survey did not ask about
nonlegal groups and institutions, such as Congress) were more a result of the
jurors’ experience within the system than a reflection of their differing
demographics.
Jurors were 20 percent more likely than Americans overall to
say they
trusted defense attorneys, and 30 percent more likely to say they
trusted prosecuting attorneys such as district or state attorneys.
Jurors were also more likely than members of the general
public to say they trust judges, though a partisan gap emerged when they were
asked about their trust in Supreme Court justices, with
Republicans expressing
more trust than Democrats. That partisan divide largely did not exist among
jurors, or the general public, when asked about state and federal judges.
“The law doesn’t say you have to know nothing about the case, The law says that you have to be able to be fair and impartial.”
“Having interviewed many jurors, their jury service does
bring a more positive view of the system,” said Steven Adler, the former
editor-in-chief of Reuters and legal reporter who wrote a book about the jury
system, “The Jury:
Trial and Error in the American Courtroom,” and worked with
Ipsos on the study.
“If you’re sitting on a jury, even for a day or two, you get
a window into a very serious and focused environment,” Adler said. “Having that
actual contact makes people, regardless of their preconceived notions, feel
better about every actor in the process, all the way up to the judges.”
Even as 58 percent of
Americans trusted juries, 71 percent
of Americans — including a majority of Democrats and Republicans — said they
were not confident the courts would be able to find jurors “willing to put
aside their prior beliefs about Donald Trump and decide the case based on the
evidence presented.”
And when asked about how different groups get treated by the
justice system, 71 percent of Americans said current or former elected
officials get special breaks, including similar shares of Democrats and
Republicans. Jurors were even more likely than nonjurors to think officials get
special treatment.
The only group that the public at large was more likely to
think got
special treatment was wealthy people.
Trump’s upcoming trials will pull jurors from the places
where the cases were filed, and, depending on the location, the makeup of the
jury pool could prove challenging for the former president. In the case in
Georgia, potential jurors would come from left-leaning Fulton County. The
federal case over the events of Jan. 6, 2021, will be held in Washington, a
liberal city where the day is still remembered viscerally, and the hush money
case involving Stormy Daniels will be held in
New York City’s Manhattan
borough, also known for being highly Democratic in makeup. The classified
documents case, however, is likely to take place in Fort Pierce, Florida, and
the jury will likely be pulled from the surrounding counties, all of which
Trump won in 2020.
Prosecutors and defense attorneys will surely be very
careful in jury selection. In the cases, prosecutors will need a unanimous
verdict to succeed; for Trump to secure a mistrial, he needs just one holdout.
Adler pointed out that political views are not
disqualifying. “The law doesn’t say you have to know nothing about the case,”
he said. “The law says that you have to be able to be fair and impartial.”
Having that actual contact makes people, regardless of their preconceived notions, feel better about every actor in the process, all the way up to the judges.
Americans were split regarding their own interest in serving
on any of the Trump juries. A little over 50 percent said they were not
personally interested in serving, with little difference along partisan lines.
Prior jury service did not increase Americans’ expectations
that Trump could get a fair jury, but former jurors were more open to jumping
into the ring themselves: Just over half said they would be interested in
serving on a jury for one of his trials.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
