The Denver Post
Bryant jury-pool bias cited
Wednesday, September 01, 2004 - Eagle - Prosecutors on Tuesday asked the judge in the Kobe Bryant case to kick off potential jurors who stated on a jury questionnaire that Bryant is "probably not guilty" or "definitely not guilty" based on what they've read, seen or heard.
The belief, some analysts said, is that several potential jurors have concluded that Bryant is not guilty and are biased against the prosecution. Prosecutor Ingrid Bakke made the request with regard to answers of Question 72, one of 82 questions the potential jurors answered in the questionnaire Friday. By law, prosecutors are given the right to kick off only a minimal number of jurors during jury selection, called peremptory challenges. But if potential jurors are biased against the prosecution to the point they can't change their views, a judge may excuse them from jury service "for cause" at an early stage of the proceedings. As a result, prosecutors can save their peremptory challenges until later in the process. David Lugert, an Eagle lawyer and former prosecutor, and jury consultant Karen Lisko said that Bakke's request is an indication that a number of potential jurors think Bryant is innocent. In open court Tuesday, Bakke made it clear that some jury pool members believe Bryant is innocent, Lugert said. The comments of Bakke and defense attorney Hal Haddon show that Eagle County residents are polarized on the question of the basketball player's guilt, Lugert said. Lisko said that the prosecution request at this stage is out of the ordinary. "The prosecution is perhaps concerned that they may have more jurors starting out in favor of the defense, when typically, the bigger concern is that the criminal defendant is starting the game a few to several points behind," said Lisko, a jury consultant with Denver-based Persuasion Strategies, a service of the Denver law firm of Holland & Hart.
Click here for the questions asked of potential jurors in the People v. Bryant case.
Click here for the official court website with officials court orders, filings and documents in the People v. Bryant case.
Click here to see a copy of the felony charges against Bryant in the PDF format. case.
Click here for a chronology of the Bryant case.
Click here for The Denver Post's graphic describing the events of June 30, 2003.
Click here for an interactive presentation on Bryant's career.
Click here for the 9NEWS archive on the case.
Click here for the CourtTV archive on the case.
He is accused of sexually assaulting a front desk employee at an upscale hotel near Edwards. Bryant says the sexual encounter was consensual. The choices on Question 72 range from "definitely guilty" to "definitely not guilty" with several variations in between. Bakke told Judge Terry Ruckriegle that if potential jurors respond "probably not guilty" or "definitely not guilty," they should be kicked out of the Bryant jury pool if the opinion is based on what they read in the media or from other sources. Bakke said there is a clear distinction between a juror who believes a defendant is innocent based on the presumption of innocence versus a juror who believes the defendant innocent based on information obtained before trial. Jury consultants said some judges would grant Bakke's request while other judges would allow the defense to "rehabilitate" potential jurors who claim they have made up their minds that Bryant is not guilty because they do not want that candidate dismissed. The term to "rehabilitate" means that the defense is given the opportunity to ask such potential jurors to set aside everything they've heard outside court and reach a verdict solely on what they've heard in court. Question 72 states: "Based on what you have read, seen or heard about this case, which of the following reflects your opinion of whether or not Kobe Bryant is guilty or not guilty of the sexual charges. Definitely guilty. Probably guilty. Possibly guilty. Possibly not guilty. Probably not guilty. Definitely not guilty. Not enough to decide." Sarah Murray, a senior trial consultant with Trial Behavior Consulting in San Francisco, believes the question is on point. "It's a good question. It is not biased toward one side or another," Murray said. "Rather than asking people to answer yes or no, it allows them to speak to the strength of their convictions." Staff writer Howard Pankratz can be reached at 303-820-1939 or hpankratz@denverpost.com . |