would be opossed to the idea of somebody who setting fires
Actually I’m thinking it’s more likely that they got rid of him on the chance that he knows something about fires and the telltale signs of arson. Lawyers might not want a bigot but they definitely don’t want an expert on the Jury.
It’s this, however also, firefighters are statistically the most likely people to be arsonists, and the lawyer definitely doesn’t want an expert on the jury who is also potentially sympathetic to the defendant!
Yes, generally speaking, the more intelligent you appear the riskier the trial becomes if you’re judging. If they want experts, they’ll pay someone they know will align with their side to show up. As for jurors, they want the average joe. Smart enough to put on his socks and drive to court, but also obedient enough to feel awe and respect for the institutions.
Actually I’m thinking it’s more likely that they got rid of him on the chance that he knows something about fires and the telltale signs of arson. Lawyers might not want a bigot but they definitely don’t want an expert on the Jury.
It’s this, however also, firefighters are statistically the most likely people to be arsonists, and the lawyer definitely doesn’t want an expert on the jury who is also potentially sympathetic to the defendant!
Yes, generally speaking, the more intelligent you appear the riskier the trial becomes if you’re judging. If they want experts, they’ll pay someone they know will align with their side to show up. As for jurors, they want the average joe. Smart enough to put on his socks and drive to court, but also obedient enough to feel awe and respect for the institutions.