Jury Service, Reform and Fair Trials

Commentators have suggested several options to meet this challenge. Some have proposed scrapping the lay jury for a jury of technocrats or those with expertise in the field at issue, known as “special” or “blue ribbon” juries, in complex cases. A few have proposed that jurors meet certain educational qualifications for such trials. While there is merit to these ideas, there is an easier way to ensure that juries are competent to hear complex cases while preserving the traditions of our jury system: to ensure that people of all backgrounds have both an opportunity and obligation to serve on a jury. The collective wisdom of a truly representative jury would provide the foundation for hearing and deciding product liability cases in a fair and balanced way.

Unfortunately, by the time a product liability case makes its way to voir dire, litigators may be surprised at how few people are left in the jury pool. Many citizens are exempt from jury service. Some prospective jurors may easily avoid jury service; some take advantage of the vague standard to obtain an excuse for “hardship.” Others may legitimately need to be excused from jury service due to poor jury service laws. The result may often be a jury that does not include the wide range of experience and values of the community.