Daybell Jury Selection Day 3

April 3, 2024:

• 34 prospective jurors were called. They were broken into smaller groups for voir dire.

DAY 3 JURORS

EXCUSED JURORS

• Juror 1198: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Started a job recently. Two concerns - recently starting a job he only has access to the person he’s replacing for a few weeks. The knowledge he should be learning will be leaving with the person. Is only compensated for 2 weeks of jury service. Sole provider, has four children. Two children doing soccer. Was going to do a triathlon but dropped out.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1242: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Didn’t list any hardships in his questionnaire. Didn’t fully realize the implications of the time involved. Two concerns. Hardship of work. Spoke with HR and they grant him the time off to attend they do not compensate him. 8 - 10 weeks would be a $25,000+ loss. He is 63, single, and that would have a high impact on his retirement and personal savings. In June he was diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus, an autoimmune disorder. Certain triggers cause flareups. Can result in hair loss, rashes, fatigue, nausea, and inability to participate in pretty much anything. The stress and anxiety would potentially impact the disease which could make him unable to participate. A bad day for him could last 3, 5, 7 days. Has had 3 flareups since June. One was two months. Last one he experienced was February of this year, a 5-7 day stint. He has no control over it. He manages his diet and lifestyle to avoid stressful situations, sunlight, heat, and exhaustion. Has an elderly dog who has an englarged heart. She is on her last year. Requires medication two times a day. Works from home. If he needed to go to an office he would need to go on disability. Could provide a written doctor’s note about his disease.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1332: Challenge for Cause - Defense. (Hardship)
• Her hardship is her husband. He is the sole provider. They don’t know anyone else there. He works in the middle of nowhere. He’s on a specific diet. She prepares and packs all of his food for however long he will be gone. He’s basically always on call. When a machine breaks he has to go. She can’t definitely say that the court schedule will allow her to do this. He works in Oregon, Washington, Nevada, California, and Idaho. Can get a call anytime. Works on giant machines that transfer power to the utilities. Two plants he takes care of in Idaho, all the other plans are at least 6 hours, one way, away. He can’t prepare his own meals and adhere to his strict diet. He can’t just hop in the car and go to town and get a sandwich. He’s on a special diet and can’t eat out. He gets sick when he does. She works really hard to keep him healthy and keep them going. He’s older now and it would be nice if he would be able to retire when he turned 65 but that’s not the case anymore. Has been together with her husband almost 45 years. Couldn’t handle the sequestration. Being away from a lifelong partner. Distracted about how her husband’s health is doing.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1535: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Concerned about providing for his family taking this time off. Worries about paying the mortgage. Has no vacation time to use until the end of the summer. Does not know work’s compensation policy. Small business, about 20 employees. Wife works part time.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1541: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Concerned with work. A team of three, something about an administrator, a temp, and surgery. Coworker will be out for three weeks. Concerned about her team at work. Training a new administrator on April 8th. Works for [?] county highway district. Administrator left. Other technician has back surgery on April 18th. Will be really shorthanded. Stepdaughter has a graduation on Friday in Twin Falls.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1585: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Didn’t think it would be a hardship because she thought she could finish her semester online. Full time college student, wants to finish the semester because she has only one more to go. She would have to delay graduation for another semester. Cannot take courses online. Semester ends beginning of May. Has a 3-year-old son.
• Juror is excused.

Correcting Questionnaires

• Juror 1332: Wasn’t feeling well when they filled out the questionnaire. Looking back now [bad audio.]
• Juror 1378: [bad audio] something about the paid time off policy for jury duty at work.

GROUP VOIR DIRE

• Juror 1204: Challenge for Cause - Defense. (Hardship)
• Possible hardship. Family vacation June 15th. If the trial runs long it’s a concern. Preplanned and pre-paid. Would be “highly motived” (Prior’s words) to get the verdict done by the 15th.
• Juror is not excused.

“Brutal honesty”

• Juror 1392: [bad audio] telling the truth. Telling it like it is.
• Juror 1379: Agrees.

Graphic images

• 1320: [called upon by Prosecutor Blake] Has adult children. Has no concern about looking at the images as long as it goes toward the facts of the case. Could give them the weight he feels they’re due.
• 1365: [called up by Prosecutor] Has no concern about looking at images of children that are unpleasant or graphic if it’s in a court related environment and will allow the truth to come out.

Probably/Hopefully/For Sure

Given pilot analogy.

• Juror 1358: He wouldn’t be his first choice. He or she should have some idea of when they will land, how to land. Will not feel comfortable.
• Juror 1389: Wouldn’t want to be on that plane. What else is he gonna make a mistake on?

Regarding Jury Instructions and Not Adding Your Own Elements

Prosecutor asks the jury to think of a time that they had to do something a certain way. Gives example of child wanting cheesy eggs made specifically.

• Juror 823: Has somewhat had that experience.
• Juror 1204: Can’t recall an experience to that extent. His kids are pretty easygoing.
• Juror 1251: Is okay with deviating from the recipe.

Circumstantial Evidence Instruction

• Juror 823: [bad audio]
• Juror 1424: [bad audio] wouldn’t need to see the rain.

Conspiracy

Gives Super Bowl win analogy.

• Juror 1358: Agrees everyone on the team should get a ring.

DEFENSE VOIR DIRE

“All that glitters is not gold”

• Juror 1365: [called upon by Prior]: Look at it more of like the perfectly dressed couple and perfect house and you think my gosh they’re making all this money and you find out that just because it’s on the surface that deep down, it’s glittering on the outside but everyone has issues on the inside.
• Juror 1379: [called upon by Prior]: Loved the description. Thinking less of a literal sense. Just because something is shiny doesn’t mean it’s necessarily valuable or gold-like.
• Juror 1389 [called upon by Prior]: A lot of things glitter like light striking of a crystal. Other reflective surface. It stands to reason it’s not gonna be gold no matter what.
• Juror 1392: [called upon by Prior]: Can’t judge a book by its cover.

Regarding Recipes and Instructions / Speculations

• Juror 1251: [called upon by Prior] Thinks it’s okay to speculate when you’re making a major decision in your life. You can have to make major decisions without having all the information. You just think through the outcomes.
• Juror 1358: [called upon by Prior] Very few things have recipes. [bad audio] Recipes are black and white but there is a lot of grey. [Is an accountant.]

Honesty

• Juror 823: [called upon by Prior] Most people try to be as honest as they can. Sometimes people are a little more dishonest to get away with something or because of their feelings.
• Juror 1320: [called upon by Prior] Sometimes people are dishonest in business relationships. Personal relationships, too.
• Juror 1378: [called upon by Prior] Recently brought a used car from a dealership. Someone before trading in the car changed codes in the system to get a better trade-in value. They were not cheap issues. The dealership has been awesome working with him but he’s not grateful he doesn’t have his car.
• Juror 1379: [called upon by Prior] It’s a big topic. Agrees with what’s been said. People try to be honest but they fudge the truth, maybe to spare someone’s feelings. Generally people are motivated to be honest.

Individual Voir Dire

Juror 823: [didn’t appear when supposed to]

• No confusion. Honest mistake. Uses his phone as his alarm clock. It died somehow overnight and he woke up already too late. Considers himself dependable enough to make it here each day. He’s in the military. They’re on time.
• Supports the death penalty. Could follow instructions in the case.
• A murder with children involved is not automatically a death penalty case.

Juror 1204: [possible bias]

• Learned a bit about the case from the news. Learned Chad Daybell was involved and that he was going to trial.
• Has not formed an opinion.
• Supports the death penalty. Has its time and place, is not to be taken lightly.
• Will follow the instructions in the case.
• Not every murder is a death penalty case.

Juror 1251: [has no hardship]

• Hasn’t followed the case in the news at all. Isn’t familiar with Chad Daybell.
• “I wish I could say yes” but has no hardship. Any time you’re involved in a case like this that takes a lot of time and emotional energy, for me I try not to even involve myself in dramas or news or things like that. As I was thinking about that question I realize it probably makes me a good candidate but I wanted to be honest about my exposure and hardships and it’s like I can make things up but if I don’t have anything there’s no reason why I shouldn’t be serving.
• “I have 0% energy for this process”. More connected to people who watch news and are going to sensationalize things or not looking into their own lives. Spend a lot of their time reading news headlines. I don’t do that. I don’t watch the news. I see when it’s trying to get my attention or trying to get me to think a certain way. 0% energy for the media.
• Does not want to be on the jury but would hope people would be stepping up if she was being prosecuted. If chosen she could commit to the ten weeks.
• Work schedule [bad audio]
• Wanting to be here is kind of sick. Can’t say anyone wants to be here.
• Trusts that by answering honestly and letting the chips fall it’s what is meant to happen.
• Supports the death penalty.
• Will follow the instructions.

Juror 1320: [possible hardship]

• Will get ten days pay and then will have to take time off. Six weeks of pay, the rest will not be paid. Would not be living on the street after that but would be worse off.
• Heard a bit about the case but could be objective.
• Supports the death penalty if it’s what the law says. Would follow the judge’s advice. Would equally balance life in prison with the death penalty based on the facts of the case.

Juror 1358: [possible hardship]

• Is an accountant. April 15th is an important date for his company. He works at a private company as the controller. April 15th is a corporate deadline. Has made a lot of progress in the last week knowing this was a possibility. He can work nights and weekends through the 15th unless he’s sequestered between now and then.
• No issues with sequestration in May or June.
• Generally favors the death penalty but would base the decision on the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• The death penalty should not be imposed in every case where a murder has been committed.

Juror 1365: [prior knowledge of case]

• Has heard over the years when the children were found. It was on the news. When Lori was convicted it was on the news. Did not seek out the news. Just a matter of the news was on and she heard it.
• Can put Lori’s conviction out of her mind and judge Chad fairly.
• Believes the media sometimes doesn’t report all the of the truth.
• Is going to base any decisions on the facts of the case.
• Supports the death penalty.
• Would follow the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• The death penalty is “absolutely not” appropriate in every murder case.
• Neutral on the death penalty and will look at all the facts before making a decision would be more accurate.

Juror 1378: [possible hardship]

• Only worried about his job because he started January 2nd. HR is willing to work with him. Is not worried anymore.
• If selected being a juror won’t be a financial hardship or an impairment to his job.
• Supports the death penalty. Would base a decision on the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• A guilty verdict needs 100% sure beyond a shadow of a doubt.
• He could follow a reasonable doubt instruction. He has to be guilty to the law. Will follow the judge’s instructions on what the law is.
• There was another issue with the questionnaire that the prosecution wanted to ask about but Attorney Prior asked for a sidebar.

Juror 1379: [prior knowledge of case]

• Watched the news. Usually has the news on in the background.
• Could be impartial.
• Supports the death penalty.
• Would follow the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• Is more neutral to the death penalty.
• Death penalty is not appropriate in every case. Egregious circumstances it’s probably appropriate.
• No pre-conceived notion about what the end is gonna look like.

Juror 1389: [prior knowledge of case]

• Knows what was in the news up until he was called for jury duty. It was hard to miss.
• It would be extremely difficult not to have formed some sort of an opinion.
• It makes it more impactful the victims in this case were small children. It hits you hard. Something happened to those children. Who or what did it, I don’t know. Just whatever’s been reported.
• What he knows will be at the back of his mind.
• Prosecution moves to excuse juror for cause.
• Juror is excused.

Juror 1392: [checked the box indicating a defendant should testify]

• May not have read it closely. Is willing to follow instruction.
• Supports the death penalty in the right circumstances and if someone is proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt.
• Could be impartial.
• Death penalty is not appropriate in every case.
• Could follow instructions on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Juror 1424: [prior knowledge of the case]

• Has general knowledge. Hasn’t followed it for two or three years.
• Had Court TV at one point and would see it there.
• Had learned about a “trail of death.”
• Knows JJ Vallow has special needs and was sweet natured.
• If he didn’t know anything further he would lean toward guilty.
• Would follow the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• Prosecution moves to excuse juror for cause.
• Juror is excused.

Pre-Jury Matters

• On March 28th the court issued a gag order. Counsel is prohibited from speaking to the media during jury selection but also addresses those who approach counsel. They are to report it to the court if it happens. Court is admonishing media that counsel is not able to speak to them.

Group 2

• Juror 240 and 265 need to be addressed regarding the juror affirmations.

Group 2 Jurors

Excused Jurors

• Juror 1747: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Just discharged his last employee. Is now the operator of a single-man company. Had help and now he doesn’t. Is the sole source of income. Ten weeks would lose him contracts. He wouldn’t be able to pay rent and utilities.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1793: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Work only pays ten days of jury duty [bad audio] Has confirmed this is the policy. Has no other source of income.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 265: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Her parents are in memory care and have severe dementia. She checks on them every day to help with activities of daily living. Takes them to medical and dental and vision appointments. No one could cover the responsibilities. Has things scheduled. She could re-schedule but they’ve been scheduled for months now. Would not be so concerned about her parents she couldn’t focus. Has kids in elementary school. A challenge, not insurmountable. Finding childcare and rescheduling their appointments as well. Family travel plans the 24th - 30th. Soccer tournament.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 311: Judge Excusal. (Hardship)
• Hardship issues being discussed at sidebar with a white noise machine. Off the record.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 328: Challenge for Cause - Prosecution. (Hardship)
• Work camp May 26th - 31st. She’s helped plan and run the camp for 23 years. She has people who count on her to be there. Staff could find someone to lead her team. “I’m sure they’d find someone.”

Jury Information Form

• Juror 250: Wife’s work title is [bad audio]. Thought he only had 3 weeks paid time off. Will actually be paid the entire time.
• Juror 328: Medical condition has changed since she filled it out.

Group Voir Dire

Brutal Honesty

• Juror 1761: [called upon by Attorney Blake] being totally honest whether it’s good or not.
• Juror 1758: [called upon by Attorney Blake] [bad audio] fair.

Graphic photos

• Juror 1758: [called upon by Attorney Blake] would rather not say their concerns about the photos. Would not like to talk in private. Possibly has concerns she couldn’t give the photos the weight they were due.
• Prosecution moves for cause. Defense stipulates.
• Juror is excused.
• Juror 1640: [called upon by Attorney Blake] Seeing those images on humanity side of things would be difficult. Would not impact a decision.
• Juror 250: Media sensationalizes things to get more viewers. Probably won’t react to graphic pictures. Saw gory videos, like liveleak, when he was growing up.
• Juror 1623: Her profession is safety. She might have a reaction to the photos but it wouldn’t make decisions.

Probably/Hopefully/For Sure

Given pilot analogy.

• Juror 438: [called upon by Attorney Blake] Wouldn’t feel comfortable because the pilot is unsure.
• Juror 250: [called upon by Attorney Blake] Wouldn’t feel comfortable because they wouldn’t be qualified for what they’re doing.

Conspiracy

Gives Super Bowl win analogy.

• Juror 1623: [called upon by Attorney Blake] Agrees everyone on the team should get a ring.
• Juror 240: [called upon by Attorney Blake] Agrees. A lot of times it’s not a player’s choice if they’re on the second string. They’d probably like to be on the field too. They’re part of the team, they deserve a ring.

Circumstantial Evidence Instruction

• Juror 1624: It obviously rained.
• Juror 438. Same thing. It rained, it hailed, something. It got wet.
• Juror 512: It rained.

Does Chad Need to Testify or Prove His Innocence?

• Juror 1112: [called upon by Prior] just trying to make sure what he was asking. We will see all the evidence. He’s already claimed he’s not guilty. We need to look at the evidence. He doesn’t need to do anything extra.

Difficulty Sitting For Long Periods

• Juror ?: It will be difficult for her to sit for long periods. Needs to stand up after a few hours.
• Juror 512: Gets restless tingling through her body. She has medication. [bad audio] Doesn’t affect her ability to think. If you’re okay with that it’s okay.

Speculation

• Juror 1640: [called upon by Prior] I try not to. If it’s a major decision I like to know as much concrete facts as I can.
• Juror 1761: [called upon by Prior] Should make decisions based on facts.
• Juror 657: [called upon by Prior] You shouldn’t guess, you really need to weigh everything you have. Everything presented to you properly you should weigh.
• Juror 537: [called upon by Prior] Important, especially if it will affect you or those around you, you make the best decision based on what you have. If you try to guess, you’re not taking the facts [bad audio] You’re maybe letting your heart or someone else’s influence cause you to make a decision.
• Juror 438: [talking very fast] You’re talking about two different things here. Are you talking about the case? Sometimes I don’t have all the facts. It might be a financial decision. I collect all the facts [bad audio] but there is an element of speculation, becomes personal, you have to make a decision.

“All that glitters is not gold”

• Juror 1112: [called upon by Prior] Agrees. There are a lot of things that are distracting or might look really nice or things you think are good and realize they’re not. Things that are worth more than gold are probably not tangible. Not always a face value on things.
• Juror 537: [called upon by Prior] If a job opportunity is presented to you and they hype it up and say it’s gonna be better than the place you’re at already, same thing you’re doing, more money, better culture, better emotionally and physically, you go to the other place and you still love what you’re doing but it’s not what they said it was gonna be.

Jury Affirmations

• Juror 240: Wrote that he has watched the jury deliberations. He meant selection. He was curious about what questions would be asked of the jurors and so he watched some of the livestream, about half an hour of it. Would not happen again.
• Sidebar. Parties stipulate that the juror can be excused. Motion for Cause - Prosecution [and defense]. (Bias)
• Juror is excused.

Individual Voir Dire

Juror 1112: [failure to appear previously]

• Embarrassed. Misunderstood the directions. Knew to check in, called in, didn’t recognize that it was different instructions. When she found out she missed the correct week to log in, she called and asked if she could still show up. Just her not looking at the instructions fully. Is generally dependable.
• Somewhat followed the case.
• Does have an opinion. Circumstances seem to obvious he was involved.
• No preconceived notion of guilt.
• He was obviously there on video and was with Lori Vallow. Can’t remember if they were officially married. Knew they knew each other.
• Has followed East Idaho News and court summaries of her trial. Her husband is from that area. That’s what piqued their interest. Someone was doing summaries of what’s happening in the case and she would look into that and see what was going on in the case. It was very covered.
• Has seen Dateline and Netflix.
• Doesn’t watch a lot of news stories. The media says what they want to say. By being part of the trial there is more evidence than what they are going to say in the media.
• You have to take what’s in front of you to really decide.
• Prosecution moves for cause.
• Juror is excused.

Juror 1623: [prior knowledge]

• Saw the final verdict in Lori’s case televised and saw news reports.
• Knows the children’s bodies were found on Chad Daybell’s property and that Tamara Daybell’s body has been exhumed.
• Facts are facts.
• Could set aside what she knows.
• Knew about when they were in Hawaii and Chad said he didn’t know where the kids were at. Didn’t learn anything past that.
• The news doesn’t always share everything that you should now. Can’t make an opinion without all the information in front of her. Everyone has an opinion but she has to have a fact in front of her to make an opinion.
• Her profession is human resources and safety. She has to have the facts.
• No inference of guilt based on Lori’s conviction.
• Won’t discus with other jurors.
• Prosecution moves for cause.
• Juror is excused.

Juror 1624: [bias, death penalty]

• Supports the death penalty. Would follow the facts, law, and instruction in the case.
• Thinks the death penalty should be considered in every death penalty case. Would follow instructions not to seek it.
• If they’re asking and the state laws allow it there is no question of the death penalty.
• Can consider Chad Daybell innocent with a clean slate.
• Thought the judge decided death penalty or life in prison.
• Will vote for the death penalty unless someone proves there’s a reason not to.
• Can set aside personal feelings or leanings and follow the court’s instructions.
• Lived in Florida when Ted Bundy was around.
• Defense moves for cause. State objects.
• Juror is not excused.

Juror 1640: [possible hardship, prior knowledge]

• Family vacation May 8th - 10th. Airlines can be rescheduled if needed.
• Saw headlines from Idaho Statesman and social media: Instagram would’ve been the platform, NPR would’ve been the outlet.
• Has not followed the case closely.
• Knew about Hawaii.
• May have talked about the case with family members who were watching stuff about the case on TV.
• Can put what she knows about the case out of her mind and be impartial.
• Supports and opposes the death penalty. Sees both sides, overall opposed to the death penalty.
• Does not think the death penalty should be considered in every murder case.
• Will follow the law and instructions in the case.

Juror 1761: [possible hardship]

• Needs to arrange childcare.
• She can likely get into another cohort of the training in another year. It won’t substantially impact her employment.
• She has her kids 85% of the time and would have to coordinate with their father who travels for work if she is sequestered.
• As long as they have an adult her kids are fine. They’re older children.
• Her dad is normally the backup childcare plan but he is traveling. The children’s father has a significant other who could probably watch them and she has friends who could help out as well.
• Is a clinical psychologist.
• Would not be concerned about fairness due to her background.
• Has not been involved in the criminal justice system in terms of conducting competency evaluations.
• Has testified as an expert in a parental rights termination case.
• Opposes the death penalty. “I am not a big fan.” Recognizes it’s legal.
• Doesn’t know of anything that would impact her ability to follow instructions.
• Imposing the death penalty would not cause her any ethical problems with her license.
• Morally she thinks there are issues with the death penalty in general. Doesn’t get to make that decision. If that’s part of the penalty, that’s part of the penalty.

Juror 250: [prior knowledge, possible hardship, health concerns]

• Has three weeks of paid time off. Irrelevant because his organization with cover the entire time of service.
• Doesn’t see or hear things at certain frequencies. [may possibly be an audio problem only] If he can replay or turn the volume up it should be fine. [There are accommodations.]
• Took a psych class while going to CW. He needed a core class and psych was one of them. Every time he went in there he seemed to know everything about everyone. He seemed really pompous. He’d talk about how humans are so easy to predict. It didn’t sit well with him. He pays attention to a lot. He drank a 12 oz sugar free red bull hidden behind his podium and he called this out. He ended up failing the class because he would want you to tell him different ways about how God doesn’t exist. He’s not going to compromise his morals. If he wanted to pass the class, he needed to.
• Can follow instructions. Innocent until proven guilty.
• Would not disregard any instructions.
• [Law enforcement bias box checked on questionnaire.] Doesn’t know this applies to Idaho officers but has seen other states where officers will lie or turn off their body cams. Kind of a middle ground. Not actually sure how to answer that. There is a little bit of bias on other videos he’s seen that would be in the back of his head. He’s had “so many” interactions with Idaho officers and they’ve all been great. Doesn’t think cops should ever turn off their bodycam while in the middle of something, that would be a concern. On the whole does not have a negative opinion of police officers.
• Didn’t quite understand what would bring a death penalty to someone. Obvious a law needs to be followed and there should be consequences for murder.
• Supports the death penalty. The death penalty would be justified in a murder case.
• Would follow the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• Hasn’t actually had a thought about it in his life “I just know that bad people have penalties.”
• The death penalty is not appropriate in every murder case. Will look at the evidence in the case.

Juror 438: [prior knowledge, possible hardship]

• Knows about Lori being tried in Arizona for a second trial. Doesn’t know all the details of it. Called her “Lori Daybell.”
• Didn’t follow her case closely.
• Won an incentive at work. Diehard Detroit Lions fan. Born and raised in Michigan. [?] one time for the rest of my life. I’ve somewhat come to peace that I might not be able to go. This would take priority over that.
• [bad audio] would be able to be impartial [?]

• [courtroom is cleared, broadcast is stopped]
• Two jurors will be spoken to without the public
• Based on the remaining jurors voir dired, Juror 657 was excused. Can’t confirm at the moment, though.

Juror 512: [possible hardship]

• Her daughter is having knee surgery. Thinks she can make it work.
• Has personal doctor’s appointments but they can be moved. They need to be done by July 15th for a trip to Europe. It’s all pre-paid.
• Knows there are guidelines and rules that establish the death penalty as an option. Feels comfortable following guidelines and rules. Any decision would be based on those rules.
• Supports the death penalty. Generally opposed but can put aside feelings against the death penalty if it is called for by the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• Is not in favor of the death penalty in every case where a murder is committed.
• Would be willing to follow the instructions whether it is to consider or not consider the death penalty.

Juror 537:

• Is neutral to the death penalty. Did not check supports or opposed. Is not strongly for or opposed. Huge arc in what you believe, what you can do, can’t do. No strong opinion. Is it reasonable? I do believe it’s a reasonable consequence. Not morally opposed. Would never stand up against it and say it’s unthinkable.
• Generally opposed but can put aside feelings against the death penalty if it is called for by the facts, law, and instructions in the case.
• There is no preconceived notion of whether it’s good or bad or if she’s opposed or for it.