The term voir dire is a legal phrase referring to the standard set on jurors to state the truth in the cases they decide. It comes from Old French language referring to “what is true” (Patterson, 2015). The purpose of this procedure was to challenge a member of the jury to tell the truth regarding an issue through taking the oath of voir dire. Nowadays, the term is used to refer to the trial within a trial, where there is issue regarding admissibility of evidence or the competence of a witness. This paper analyzes the use of this procedure and the effectiveness in reaching its objectives.
Voir dire is no longer just a term used to initiate a trial within a trial. In its current use in the United States, this is the process through which members of the jury are selected based on their backgrounds and potential biases in the case in question (Beck, 1997). Based on these standards, attorneys may accept or reject members of the public from sitting on a jury. Therefore, the attorney measures the fitness of the person in participating. Attorneys can reject the juror without giving any reasons (peremptory challenges), or based on their own reasoning (discretionary challenge) (Beck, 1997).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
With that in mind, it is necessary to determine the objectivity of the person participating in the case, whether an expert witness or a juror to avoid unfair outcomes in cases. The current system has thus far been able to deal with the challenge of the lack of objectivity. Nonetheless, it is not possible to constitute an entirely objective jury as people are subject to emotional responses even during cases. However, this process has effectively weeded out potential jurors who decide a case with pre-conceived judgments. As a result, the state provides the defendant with the highest standard of decision-making in pursuit of the access to a fair trial.
References
Beck, C. R. (1997). The Current State of the Peremptory Challenge. Wm. & Mary L. Rev., 39 , 961.
Mason, C. (1989). Jago v The District Court of NSW and others [1989] HCA 46 . Retrieved March 29, 2017, from Network Knowledge: http://netk.net.au/Australia/Jago.asp
Patterson, J. S. (2015). How to Succeed at Voir Dire through Style and SubstancE. The Brief, 44(3) , 47.
