The First Conversation With a Jury
There is a moment in every trial preparation process where an attorney has to stop talking and start listening.
That moment often begins during voir dire.
Voir dire is the process of questioning potential jurors before a trial begins. It is where attorneys, judges, and the parties learn more about the people who may ultimately decide the outcome of a case. It is not simply a checklist of questions or a formal exercise that happens before opening statements. It is the first opportunity to understand the individuals who will be sitting in judgment.
After years in the courtroom, I have learned that people are far more complicated than the assumptions we sometimes make about them. A person’s occupation, age, background, or life experiences may tell us something, but it does not tell us everything.
The question I always return to is this: Are we truly listening to the answers we receive, or are we simply waiting for our turn to speak?
Voir Dire Is About Understanding People
Attorneys spend a significant amount of time preparing arguments, reviewing evidence, and studying the law. Those things matter. They should matter. Preparation is the foundation of competent representation.
But a trial is ultimately experienced by people.
Jurors bring their own experiences, beliefs, expectations, biases, and concerns into the courtroom. That is not a criticism, but simply human nature. Every person views the world through the lens of what they have lived through. If we are honest with ourselves, we will see that we all have preconceived notions of what the trial experience should be. Even attorneys should see this in themselves.
A juror who has had a positive experience with law enforcement may approach certain testimony differently than someone who has had a negative experience. Someone who has worked in healthcare may interpret medical testimony differently than someone who has never stepped inside a hospital beyond personal experiences.
Neither perspective is automatically right or wrong. The responsibility of an attorney is to understand those perspectives and determine how they may affect the ability to fairly evaluate the evidence.
That requires humility.
The Challenge of Asking the Right Questions
One of the most difficult parts of voir dire is understanding that the best questions are not always the most obvious ones.
An attorney can ask, “Can everyone be fair?” Almost everyone will say yes.
But the more important question is often why someone believes they can be fair.
What experiences have shaped their opinions? What assumptions might they carry into the courtroom? Are there issues they have strong feelings about that could affect their ability to consider the evidence objectively?
Good voir dire requires patience. It requires giving people enough space to answer honestly. Sometimes the most meaningful information comes after the first answer, when someone feels comfortable enough to explain their thoughts.
Attorneys, by nature, are trained to advocate. We are trained to make arguments and persuade. Those skills are valuable, but voir dire requires something different.
It requires listening.
Lessons Learned Through Experience
Early in my career, I learned that preparation is not something that happens only before a trial begins. Preparation is something that evolves through every experience.
As a prosecutor, I once handled a case that resulted in a hung jury. That experience forced me to reflect. It is easy to walk away from a difficult outcome and focus only on what others did or did not understand. It is much harder, but much more valuable, to ask what you could have done differently.
I spent time considering my approach during jury selection. Were there areas I should have explored more deeply? Were there questions I should have asked differently? Did I make assumptions instead of seeking understanding?
Those questions improved my practice.
The courtroom has a way of teaching lessons that cannot be learned from a textbook. Every trial, every conversation, and every person you encounter adds another layer of understanding.
Balancing Strategy With Fairness
Voir dire also involves difficult decisions.
Attorneys are advocates for their clients. We have a responsibility to identify concerns and make strategic decisions. At the same time, we have to remember that jury selection is not about finding people who will automatically agree with our position. In fact, the process is better called jury DE-selection. If you find jurors who admit to agreeing with everything an expert says, simply because they have credentials and a bunch of letters after their name, either you or the other attorney will automatically strike them from the list, depending on your witness lineup.
A fair jury is not necessarily a jury that thinks exactly as we do.
Sometimes the person who pauses and answers the hardest questions most thoughtfully is the person who takes the responsibility of serving on a jury most seriously. Sometimes someone whose initial response seems challenging becomes one of the most meaningful participants in the process.
The goal is not to remove, or “de-select,” every person who has a different perspective. The goal is to understand whether someone can listen, consider the evidence, and follow the law.
That distinction matters.
The Value of Listening
One of the greatest lessons I have learned throughout my career is that attorneys sometimes talk too much.
We are trained to present arguments, explain positions, and advocate strongly. Those skills are necessary. However, there is tremendous value in knowing when to stop speaking.
During voir dire, listening can reveal things that a prepared script never will. A person’s hesitation, explanation, or willingness to discuss a difficult topic can provide insight that a simple yes or no answer cannot.
Additionally, the purpose of voir dire is never to embarrass or intimidate a potential juror. Some questions hit home in ways an attorney might not even consider. For this reason, it’s important that the jurors understand that, if they are uncomfortable answering a question that pertains to them, they can feel free to approach the bench and answer privately or outside the presence of the rest of the panel entirely.
The practice of law requires constant learning. Every case teaches something. Every client brings a different perspective. Every courtroom experience offers another opportunity to improve.
Voir dire is not just the beginning of a trial. It is the beginning of understanding the people who will play a critical role in the process.
And understanding people is, in many ways, at the heart of practicing law.