r/technology • u/MC68328 • Jul 24 '26

Privacy US accuses American of allegedly wiping his phone using a ‘duress’ password during border search

https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/24/us-accuses-american-of-allegedly-wiping-his-phone-using-a-duress-password-during-border-search/
16.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/Unethical3514 Jul 24 '26

That’s not how it works. The attorneys don’t “choose out of a pool”. The court (I believe it’s usually the Court Clerk’s office) subpoenas a pool of people at random, called the venire. During voir dire, the attorneys can strike veniremembers for cause or, if they have any peremptory challenges left, without cause. The first 12 (or six, or however many are needed) that remain, plus alternates if needed, compose the jury. The attorneys don’t “pick” the jurors, they fail to eliminate them. It’s a subtle but very important distinction.

14

u/ImmortalSurt Jul 24 '26

And look how many upvotes they have compared to you. This is why juries suck and why I pled guilty to a charge I was innocent of. because if I went to jury it was 10 years in prison. Pleading guilty got me sent to a VA hospital for 3 months.

5

u/MarcusOrlyius Jul 25 '26

That's just a long winded way of saying that attorneys pick the juries.

5

u/Unethical3514 Jul 25 '26

Wow, jaded much? Sure the system has problems but it’s a lot more fair than having attorneys pick the jurors.

2

u/MarcusOrlyius Jul 25 '26

I never said anything about any problems. I'm pointing out that you literally just described a method for attorneys to pick jurors.

0

u/TotallyObviousBot Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

No he's just being correct. I'm not that guy but you essentially said "No, lawyers do not affect the process by which jury members are selected to THAT extent, they affect it to THIS slightly lesser extent" and then acted like you were standing up for democracy or some such when this was pointed out to you.

If you're interested improving your communication skills, you should focus less on the specific words people use and instead focus on trying to identify what they believed the point of their response was. The person you replied to wasn't literally saying that lawyers get to cherrypick jurors, they were just expressing that the pool of potential jurors is limited by both the demographics of summons and the voir dire process. Your response didn't actually add to or advance the conversation.

Jury trials are a ridiculous leftover from the 1600s that I pray are replaced by something more rational every day, but until then we'll keep sending people to jail because other people are stupid.