Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

(20,453 posts)

4. They need a reason to challenge a juror.

Sat Feb 1, 2014, 08:14 PM

Feb 2014

Both sides also get a limited number of "preemptory strikes", which let them challenge a juror without needing a reason.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How A Ruling On Gay Jurors Could Have A Huge Effect On The Gay Rights Movement [View all] Tx4obama Feb 2014 OP

I couldn't see that either. dipsydoodle Feb 2014 #3

Here's a little more info: Incitatus Feb 2014 #6

They need a reason to challenge a juror. NYC Liberal Feb 2014 #4

I don't think an English lawyer would be able to object to a juror without reason muriel_volestrangler Feb 2014 #11

I only mentioned that dipsydoodle Feb 2014 #12

Ah; that would have been before the 1988 act muriel_volestrangler Feb 2014 #13

K&R! countryjake Feb 2014 #9