Reference no: EM133286289
Case: A 29-year-old man formerly affiliated with a local gang, but who has since broken ties with the gang, is on trial for the armed robbery of a jewelry store in which one store employee sustained an injury to the head during the robbery. Evidence suggests that the defendant was in the area around the time of the robbery, and he matches the physical description of the perpetrator, including a distinct gang-related tattoo on the right hand. The tattoo is one commonly worn on the right hands of members of this particular gang, so it is possible another gang member committed the crime. None of the stolen jewelry has been recovered, and the perpetrator did not leave behind any compelling physical evidence, such as fingerprints or DNA. In the community where the trial is being held, there has been a lot of community outrage over ongoing criminal activity of the local gangs.
Questions:
Due to the existing community outrage against gangs and the defendant's former gang affiliation, what type of motion might the defense file before the trial begins?
How might jurors who've had prior negative experiences with members of a gang be affected by the opening statements, presentation of evidence, or closing arguments of both the prosecution and the defense?
How might jurors with loved ones who are or were in a gang be affected by the opening statements, presentation of evidence, or closing arguments of both sides?
What challenges might develop during jury deliberations between jurors sympathetic toward gangs and those biased against them?
Why is it so important to have an impartial jury?