(Last revised March 2011)

[1]          Having heard the answer(s), you must now decide whether this person is acceptable as a juror.

(Where pre-trial publicity is the basis for the challenge, select [2-A] or [2-B], or both, always followed by [3] and [4].)[1]

[2-A]       Just because a person has read, watched or listened to reports of matters relating to this case does not mean, by itself, that the person is not acceptable as a juror to try this case.

[2-B]       Just because a person has an opinion about this case does not mean, by itself, that the person is not acceptable as a juror to try this case.

(Where generic prejudice is the basis for challenge, read [2-C], [3] and [4].)         

[2-C]       Just because a person has a prejudice or bias against a racial (ethnic) group (or, against persons charged with (specify nature of crime)) does not mean, by itself, that the person is not acceptable as a juror to try this case.

[3]          What is important is whether the person is impartial in the sense that s/he would put aside any personal prejudice or bias and decide the case solely on the basis of the evidence presented in court and the instructions of the trial judge. Before finding anyone who (has read, watched or listened to reports of matters relating to this case, or has an opinion about this case), (or has a prejudice or bias against (describe as in [2-C])) acceptable as a juror, you must find that he or she would likely approach jury duty with an open mind.

[4]          Discuss the matter with one another. You may do so in private if you wish. A person will be found acceptable or not acceptable only if you both agree. Advise me of your decision simply by saying “acceptable” or “not acceptable.” If you disagree, which you are entitled to do, then tell me that you are unable to reach a decision.