After watching the verdict in the Casey Anthony trial yesterday, a case of deja vu hit me. The same feeling I had after the OJ trial.
The defense selects the most dimwitted jurors in order to give themselves the best chance to win.
When watching a high profile trial, that fact is quickly forgotten.
But when the verdict comes in, it is clear that the most important job of the defense is to finding barely functioning idiots. Those who have major problems making inferences based on evidence. In other words, those who can't put two and two together. Possibly willfully ignorant individuals, the same who deny evolution because they've never seen a human come out of a monkey's vagina.
In fact, with the death penalty looming, the defense is best to look for Creationists, because they ignore science when it is convenient for them, and more importantly, they can be liberal when it comes to the evidence because if they are wrong in voting not guilty, God will ultimately right the wrong. If they sentence the wrong person to death, the juror might wind up in hell......I think I'm onto something, The Dumb Juror's Wager.
I just wonder when it finally hits the selected juror, that the main reason the person was selected, was because they just aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
I guess that is like asking if Creationists realize they are reality deniers.
Maybe the answer is never.
Logging you in...