If a court case is decided only to find out later that a biased juror was serving, is that grounds for appeal?
Say a juror is selected for a trial that involves a company they hate, but they lie and claim they are unbiased. After the case is decided (suppose against the defendant) and the defendant pays only to find out later (perhaps a year later) that there was a biased juror, is there anything they can do?
Can they go after the juror? Are there any cases where the government has procecuted a juror for false representation?
Answers:
No. It's the job of the attorney to try and find potential jurors' biases during the voir dire process and kick them off beforehand. All peolple have biases. Some people don't like cops or people of a particular ethnicity but you can't always get that out of them and that is not a reason to go after them later. Part of the reason that there are 12 jurors is to drown out any one person's strong biases. That's also part of the gamble when having a jury as opposed to a bench trial. Also jurors have immunity and simply having an opinion about a company does not make the trial null and void. If there was a specific relation that was intentionally not made clear when asked directly about it, might be different though.
Nope. First of all, no juror is going to say "I was biased", so it's going to be almost impossible to "find out" that the juror was biased. Even then, finding out who is biased and who isn't is the attorney's job during jury selection, and one of the reasons we have such large juries is to make sure that one biased individual won't affect the result.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: