appellate court might be alarmed by hearing that a lower court judge is soliciting views on final jury instructions before the pre-trial motions for exclusion of testimony etc. and even jury selection itself. Making such instructions public prior to those events, and the arguments both ways, would make it very possible and indeed likely that jurors could be influenced in their thinking in responding to questions during jury selection.
This "give me the ending before the beginning" approach would also give a judge in the case a "roadmap" of what to exclude in pre-trial motions about evidence/testimony in order to "fit" the ending instructions. It would give that judge a ready "defense" as it were for keeping parts of the prosecutions case out. Goodness me now it seems a bit fishy "I Lean" that you want to shape the end before the beginning. As Gomer would say "Shazam!!" 
Edit history
Recommendations
2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read