After three days of jury selection in Clark County, a few distinct comparisons can be made regarding the voir dire process.
In Washoe County, the court evaluated the questionnaires of, and/or interviewed, 140 out of the first 160 jurors and had passed for cause only 12 jurors to the final jury pool. Out of those 12 jurors, the court lost one when it became aware of new information regarding the juror’s involvement in a Family Court proceeding. Additionally, a second juror in the final pool was under reconsideration, and likely would have been excused due to distinct opinions about the case.
Also of great concern to the court was the fact that every individual passed for cause to the final juror pool had an opinion about the case and had been exposed to and/or influenced in varying degrees by pre-trial media coverage.
In Clark County, as of 4 p.m. Wednesday (Oct. 17), the court evaluated the questionnaires of, and/or interviewed, 62 jurors out of the potential jury pool of 200 and passed for cause 15 of those jurors to the final jury pool.
In Washoe County, the court found the prospective jurors knew about the case, had formed an opinion, or knew someone associated with the case.
In Clark County, the prospective jurors have uniformly indicated that they have little to no knowledge about the case or the individuals involved in the case. Few of the prospective jurors have expressed any opinion about guilt or innocence.
During voir dire, attorneys have focused on substantive matters, such as the prospective jurors’ opinions on divorce, child custody, punishment and possible defenses. In Clark County, the court has not had to focus exclusively on pre-trial publicity.