SAMPLE QUESTIONS, VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
I have not intent to pry into your personal life or embarrass you in any way; however, the
duty owed to a client by an attorney dictates the necessity for making some inquiries, and I hope
that you will bear with me on this.
What is your name, please?
Are you married or single?
(If married) Please tell me the number and ages of your children.
Where are you employed?
What is the employment of your spouse?
Where do you live?
AFFIDAVIT
Do you realize the affidavit in this case is merely a formal legal pleading, a piece of
paper filed by the prosecution in order to start these proceeding, and has no greater legal effect
that a complaint or declaration in a civil case?
You don't have the idea, do you, that "where there is smoke there is fire"--and that
merely because my client was charged he must be involved in the commission of this alleged
crime?
LAW AND ORDER
Do you realize that the County Attorney and myself are both equals, both lawyers, both
equal in the eyes of the law, each doing his best to represent his client?
You are not going to give any more weight to the arguments of my adversary than to
mine merely because he bears the impressionable title "County Attorney" are you?
Have you, or has any member of your family, ever been the victim of a crime?
Have you, or has any member of your family, ever been a witness, or complainant, in a
criminal case?
Have you ever served on a jury in a criminal case?
Have you ever served on a jury in a civil case?
Have you ever been excused from serving on a jury?
Are you related to, or do you know personally, any of the lawyers or witnesses in this
case?
Are you related to or friendly with, or do you have any close acquaintance with, anyone
in the District Attorney’s office, or the police department, or any law enforcement officers, such
as federal revenue agents, or military police?
Have you ever had any close friendship with such law enforcement officer?
Have you yourself ever been a policeman or a military policeman or an employee of any
law enforcement agency?
Will you tend to believe the testimony of the policeman, because he is a policeman, more
that of any other witness?
PUBLICITY
Have you heard anything about the facts of this case before you came into the court
today?
Have your read anything about it in the newspaper?
Have you heard anything about it in the radio?
Have you heard or seen anything about it on television?
What newspaper, radio or television program do you remember?
In the account which you read or heard, did it mention the defendant here today by
name?
Did you just read or hear that, or did you get a chance to think about it and to form some
opinion on it?
Did you form an opinion as to whether he is guilty or innocent?
Of course, we haven't heard any evidence here, but in light of the newspaper, radio or
television, which you have read or seen, would it take some evidence to change your opinion?
Have you had a chance to discuss the facts of this case with anyone?
In this discussion, did anyone tell you that the defendant was innocent or guilty?
Did you say that the defendant was innocent or guilty in your discussion?
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
Do you have any quarrel with the basic concept of American justice that the burden of
proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt is always upon the prosecution and remains with the
prosecution during the entire trial?
Do you agree with the proposition that a person accuse of crime has no obligation to
prove, or disprove, any fact, and that he may remain silent?
Look at my client. As you sit here without hearing word of testimony in this case, do
you presume that he is innocent of the accusation made against him?
REASONABLE DOUBT
Do you understand, that if selected as a juror, that you, and you alone, will be the judge
of the fact, and if you have a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of my client you must, under the
law, acquit him?
Now, you know, of course, that if you are able to do so, that you will have to return a
verdict of guilty or not guilty in this case.
If you heard the evidence and you felt that the defendant was probably guilty, that is, you
weren't convinced that he was or that he wasn't, but you though the evidence showed he
probably was guilty, would you be able to return a verdict of not guilty?
Would it bother you or lay on your conscience to return a verdict of not guilty when you
thought probably he was guilty?
ACQUIT THIS DEFENDANT
After hearing all of the evidence, after listening to the instructions of the Court, and after
reading the instructions, if you have a reasonable doubt as to my client's guilt, will you vote to
acquit him because of that reasonable doubt?
SINKER
If you do have a reasonable doubt as to my client's guilt and, after listening to the
arguments of your fellow jurors when you retire to consider the case, you still have that
reasonable doubt, will you stick to your guns and refuse to change your verdict, even though it is
an unpopular one, or might result in a mistrial?
Would the inconvenience of having to spend the night away from your home prevent you
from sticking to your guns and refusing to change your verdict, if you still had that reasonable
doubt as to the guilt of this defendant?
THIS CRIME
Does it make any difference to you that the defendant charged with the crime he is
charged with committing, rather than with some other crime, as to his guilt or innocence?
IF DEFENDANT, WITH A RECORD, TESTIFIES
If the testimony shows that this defendant sold and used marijuana would you consider
those facts as evidence that the defendant killed and murdered ____________?
It would not follow, would it, that because he had sold and used marijuana, he is
probably guilty of committing this crime?
IF DEFENDANT TESTIFIES
If it is shown that my client enjoyed a good reputation in the community prior to his
being charged with this crime, will you consider such evidence in deciding whether or not he is
telling the truth?
You will have a opportunity to hear my client testify, and he will tell you certain facts
that, if you believe them, will acquit him. If you believe this testimony will you acquit him?
FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS
The lawyers in this case will not testify, and what we say is not evidence. The lawyers
will not try to tell you what the law is. That is the function of the Court. His Honor will give
you written instructions as to all of the law you will need to know to decide this case. If the
court does not instruct you as to a particular part of the law, do you understand that you are to
consider that part of the law as not applicable to the facts in this case? In other words, will you
take the Court's instructions as the law, and all the law, applicable to this case?
The court will give you its instructions in writing.
Here are samples of what these instructions will look like. Some of the instructions will be read
by me. Regardless of who reads the instructions to you, will you accept the instructions as being
the instructions of the Court?
Will you follow the Court's instructions as to the applicable law, whether you agree with
that law or not?
FAILURE OF DEFENDANT TO TESTIFY
If, in my sound legal judgement, I deem it advisable not to have the defendant testify in
his own behalf, will you agree not to draw any inference from his failure to take the witness
stand?
If the defendant does not testify, will you suspect that he is guilty?
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
The prosecution is going to be relying on circumstantial evidence to establish some of the
elements of this crime. Most of you probably already know the difference between
circumstantial evidence, but for those of you who do not, I will explain that difference.
Basically, direct evidence is where the facts are testified to by persons who saw what they were
testifying about. For example, if I see Joe Smith point a gun at John Doe and pull the trigger,
and John Doe falls to the ground. I saw Joe Smith shoot John Doe. This is direct evidence. On
the other hand if I see Joe Smith point a gun at John Doe, but I leave and go into the next room
where I hear a shot fired, and I run back into the room containing Joe Smith and John Doe, and I
find John Doe lying on the ground and Joe Smith standing over him with a smoking revolver in
his hand. This is circumstantial evidence that Joe Smith shot John Doe.
Now where you have a case which is bases on circumstantial evidence as in this case,
where nobody saw the defendant _____________ kill the deceased _____________, the
evidence to connect _____________ with his death must be like a chain in which each item of
evidence must bind the defendant to the crime. Now, this chain of circumstantial evidence is
only as strong as its weakest link.
Each and every element of circumstantial evidence must be totally inconsistent with the
defendant's innocence and must be consistent with and point to his guilt.
In other words, do you agree with the principal that in a circumstantial evidence case, if
there is any reasonable construction of the facts from which you may infer that the defendant is
innocent, you must adopt that construction and find the defendant "Not Guilty."
VOIR DIRE, CAPITAL MURDER CASE
I will now ask you some questions as to your competency to serve as a juror in Warren
County.
Are each of you of the age of twenty-one years or older? If any of you are under twenty-
one years of age, please say so, come forward and give your name to the Clerk in a slow, clear
manner so that all of the persons behind the rail can hear you.
A qualified elector is a person who is entitled to vote, in this instance, in ________
County, _____________. A freeholder is a person who has an estate in land or other real
property. A resident freeholder is someone who owns an estate in land or other real property,
and actually resides in _________ County. You are qualified to serve as a juror if you are a
resident freeholder of Warren County for more that one year, or you are a qualified elector,
either one. Is there anyone here who is not a qualified elector of ___________County and has
not been a resident freeholder of ___________County for more than one year? If you are
neither one of these, please come forward and tell the Clerk your name in a clear, slow manner
so that everyone can hear you.
The next qualification is that you be able to read and write. The Clerk will now distribute
to the jury panel a form to be completed personally by each juror prior to being impaneled. You
must complete this form personally; however, if you have any questions, the Clerk will attempt
to answer your questions, but neither he nor anyone else can complete the form for you. The
questionnaires you sent in are not a substitute for this form, which is required by law to be done.
The questionnaire need not have been completed by you, but this form must be done by you,
personally, and not by anyone else. The first question is obvious: it is your last name, then your
first name, then you middle initial. The next one is your home address, which should be your
mailing address where the Clerk can mail you your check for jury attendance. Number 3 is your
occupation, which means your job. If you are retired, put retired. If you are a housewife, put
housewife. If you are a homemaker, put homemaker. If you are not employed, put unemployed.
Number 4 is your age. We have no desire to pry into your personal life, but the law requires us
to ask that question, and you to answer it. Five is obvious. If you have a telephone, put the
number and if you do not have a telephone, put "none". Question 6: If you live in the city of
Vicksburg, put none or 0 in the space for mileage. If you live outside of _____________, put
the number of miles as best you can estimate it in the blank. Lastly, sign your name.
Is there any juror who cannot complete the form which was handed out to you? If you
cannot complete the form, please come forward and state your name slowly and clearly so that
everyone may hear.
I request of the Clerk that the completed forms be returned to me so that I may
personally examine the answers of each juror prior to impaneling this jury.
An infamous crime is a crime punishable by death or by imprisonment in a state or
federal prison or penitentiary. Have any of you ever been convicted of an infamous crime? If
you were sentenced to the penitentiary, but the sentence was suspended and you were placed on
probation, you have been convicted of an infamous crime. Do any of you meet that definition?
If you do, please come forward and give your name to the Clerk in the usual manner.
Have any of you ever been convicted of the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors within a
period of five years? If so, please come forward and give me your name.
The law requires me to ask the next question, and eventually I suppose I will get an
affirmative answer. Here is the question: Are any of you now a common gambler or habitual
drunkard? If so, please come forward.
Do any of you have a case of your own pending in the Circuit Court of _________
County and that has been actually set for trial during this vacation term? If your case has been
set over for consideration in November, please do not come forward. Are there any such
persons?
The next questions I will ask you are questions which do not require your exclusion as
jurors, but are bases on any personal privileges you may care to claim.
Every citizen over sixty-five years of age shall be exempt from services if he or she
claims the privilege. You do not have to state any hardship, sickness, inability to hear or any
other reason not to serve, if you are over the age of sixty-five years. If you are over sixty-five,
and desire to claim your privilege, I will excuse you upon your statement that you are over sixty-
five and claim that privilege. Is there anyone who is over sixty-five years of age and desires to
claim that privilege? If so, please come forward and state your name clearly and slowly so that
everyone behind the rail may hear your name.
Everyone who has served on the regular panel as a juror in the actual trial of one or more
litigated cases within two (2) years, shall be exempt from services if he or she claims the
privilege. If you claim the privilege, and you have served in the actual trial of one or more
litigated cases within two years, I will excuse you upon your coming forward and claiming the
privilege. Is there anyone who actually has served on a litigated cases as a juror within two
years and desires to claim the privilege? If so, please come forward and give your name in a
clear manner so that your name may be heard by everyone behind the rail.
If you are a lawyer practicing your profession or a physician actually in practice, you will
be excused if you claim your exemption. Are there any lawyers practicing their profession or
physicians actually in practice who were called as jurors and desire to claim their exemption? If
so, please come forward.
If you are ill, or, on account of serious illness in your family, your presence is required at
home, please come forward. You understand that your excuse of illness must be made either
under oath in open court or by certificate of a competent physician, made of his own knowledge
and not by hearsay. If you have such a certificate, or you desire to take the oath and be sworn
and state what your illness is, or the serious illness in your family is, please come forward now.
You are exempt from jury service if your attendance as a juror would cause a serious
financial loss to you or to your business. If you were incapacitated by illness or otherwise for a
week, if some other persons would be available or could reasonably be procured to carry on the
business for the week, then you are not exempt. Please also note that the serious financial loss
must be to you, and not your employer. If you were selected on this jury, and the case lasted a
week, and no other persons would be available or could reasonably be procured to carry on the
business for the week, please come forward and explain this to the court at this time.
If you are under an emergency, fairly equivalent to those just discussed, as to illness and
serious financial loss, then you must make your excuse in open court, under oath and heard and
examined in open court; provided, that when an excuse is of such a nature that to make it
publicly in open court would seriously embarrass you, I may hear your excuse in chambers in
the presence of a deputy sheriff. Does anyone meet that exemption of an emergency comparable
to illness and serious financial loss? If so, please come forward.
The indictment in this case charges that the accused, ___________, on the ______ day of
_______, _______, killed and murdered ___________, without any design to effect her death,
while the accused was engaged in the commission of arson by setting fire to a dwelling house
occupied by ___________. The burden will be on the State to prove, beyond a reasonable
doubt, all of the pertinent parts of the indictment, that is, the arson and the murder. If your
verdict is guilty as charged, then this case will go into a second phase, called a "separate
sentencing proceeding". At that time, the question will be whether the jury will impose life
imprisonment or death, depending on the circumstance the jury hears from the State and the
accused.
Does anyone have conscientious objections to the infliction of the death penalty when the
law authorizes it, in proper cases, and where the testimony warrants it? Are any of you so
opposed to capital punishment that you could not sit, listen to the evidence, listen to the law and
make your determination of guilt or innocence solely upon the evidence and the law without
considering the fact that capital punishment might be imposed? In other words, is your
conviction against the imposition of capital punishment so strong that you cannot take an oath,
knowing that a possibility exists of capital punishment in this case? Again, I am not asking you
whether or not you are opposed to capital punishment, and I will now repeat the question.
Are any of you so opposed to capital punishment that you could not sit, listen to the
evidence, listen to the law and make your determination of guilt or innocence solely upon the
evidence and the law without considering the fact that capital punishment might be imposed? In
other words, is your conviction against the imposition of capital punishment so strong that you
cannot take an oath, knowing that a possibility exists of capital punishment in this case?
Having heard the question, are any of you so opposed that you could not take your oath
as a juror in this case? If so, please come forward and state your name, loudly and clearly, and
state that you could not in this case reach a verdict solely from the evidence and the law.
I adjudge the remainder of you to be competent, qualified jurors to try this case, and I
now request the Clerk to administer your oath.
