8151Re: [infoguys-list] Digest Number 1434
- May 31, 2005In a message dated 5/31/2005 5:59:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Why jury consultants are increasingly important
You are saying, are you not, that they won because the jury consultant
manipulated the jury pool, and in effect stacked the jury. You are
also arguing, are you not, that this is not a good thing, and the
other side thus needs a jury consultant to stack the jury in their
favor. So do the two stacking attempts then cancel themselves out?
You refer to the "winning side," as if that is the goal here. I
thought justice was supposed to be the goal. Or if you win, does that
automatically mean you got justice? Or is perhaps HOW you win a
factor in obtaining justice?
Does the jury consultant on one side wear a black hat, so the jury
consultant on the other side then has a duty to wear a white hat and
straighten everything out? I hardly think the attorneys involved are
using consultants to that end, and it would be disingenuous of you to
But of course I don't expect an answer to any of these questions
because justice was never what jury consulting was about from the
beginning, and thus it's not what you are about.
If you read the article you can see what they say about PI's and JC working
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Next post in topic >>