After a group of people are randomly selected by either the state or federal district, they move on to the second step of the process referred to as “Voir Dire”. Essentially, the court and the attorneys narrow down the pool of jurors in order to try to select a group of people they believe are fit to participate in the case. Ideally, each and every juror will be open minded and unbiased about the case in order to reach a fair verdict. Every juror is interviewed and asked to discuss their backgrounds and their beliefs. Based on their responses the judge and attorneys can remove individuals from the jury pool. There are two types of objections that an attorney can use. The first is called “challenges for cause” there isn’t a limit to how many times an attorney can use this objection. When an attorney challenges a juror for cause, it is common that this is due to an individuals conflict of interest or because they have a prejudice background that pertains to the case. For example, a retired cop would not be a proper candidate to sit in a jury for a case that involves police brutality. A peremptory challenge is one in which a judge or attorney does not to give an explanation as to why they want to remove a juror from the pool. Although these objections are limited, it allows attorneys to remove those who would not be able to fathom the case and creates a better chance for an impartial jury.…show more content… During the voir dire process those who express opposition and those who are seemingly unable to set aside their moral, emotional and personal beliefs are removed. It is very common for a jury to be unable to reach a unanimous decision when the death penalty is involved and can result in a hung jury. In most cases, a new jury will be selected and the trial process will begin
