Finding reasons to strike a juror based on information given to you by the
juror when questioned is one thing. It's another thing altogether to hire a
private detective to ferret out the details of of all the potential juror's
private lives looking for reasons why any of them might secretly want revenge.
The jury system relies on the fact that it's very unlikely that this sort of
situation would ever arise.
Imagine if that level of research were
required? Imagine being called for jury duty, and then having teams of private
detectives pawing through your life, asking your neighbours questions about you,
making your private life public, looking for things you would rather not have
everyone know about. Imagine what use a "win at any cost" lawyer could make of
knowing everything about your past.
If Hogan had kept his mouth
shut, chances are no one would have been the wiser. We may never know the real
reason for why he did what he did. However, even if he wasn't motivated by a
desire for revenge, the integrity of the trial itself has been called into
question by the possibility that he was. As the saying goes, not only must
justice be done, it must be seen to be done.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
