Further Readings
Broeders, A. P. A., & van Amelsvoort, A. G. (1999). Lineup
construction for forensic earwitness identification:
A practical approach. In Proceedings of the 14th
International Congress of Phonetic Sciences
(pp. 1373–1376), University of California, Berkeley.
Read, D., & Craik, F. I. M. (1995). Earwitness identification:
Some influences on voice recognition. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1,6–18.
Solan, L. M., & Tiersma, P. M. (2003, November/December).
Falling on deaf ears [Electronic version]. Legal Affairs.
Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://www.legalaffairs.org/
issues/November-December-2003/story_solan_
novdec03.msp
Van Wallendael, L. R., Surace, A., & Hall-Parsons, D.
(1994). “Earwitness” voice recognition: Factors affecting
accuracy and impact on jurors. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 8,661–677.
Yarmey, A. D. (1995). Earwitness speaker identification.
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1,792–816.
Yarmey, A. D., Yarmey, A. L., Yarmey, M. J., & Parliament, L.
(2001). Commonsense beliefs and the identification of
familiar voices. Applied Cognitive Psychology,
15,283–299.VOIR DIRE
Voir dire is a legal proceeding during which attorneys
and/or judges question prospective jurors (called
venirepersons) to determine their fitness for jury duty.
The purpose of voir dire is to uncover bias; the proce-
dure is designed to identify and eliminate members of
the venire panel who are unable to be impartial and
who do not meet statutory requirements of jury service.
The format and scope of voir dire questioning varies
across jurisdictions and the discretion of the trial judge.
Research on voir dire is limited and primarily concerns
its effectiveness, the relative effectiveness of extended
versus minimal voir dire, and the factors influencing
juror honesty during voir dire questioning.Purpose of Voir Dire
Voir dire,a term derived from Middle French which
means “to speak the truth,” is a pretrial legal proceed-
ing. During voir dire, the members of the jury pool,
known as the venire panel, are questioned by the judge,
the attorneys, or both. Questioning may be directed
toward the group as a whole or administered privatelyto individual jurors. Based on their responses to this
questioning, prospective jurors are chosen for removal
from the jury. The legal purpose of voir dire is to
uncover any existing jury bias and to protect against the
possibility that the defendant receives an unfair trial.
This questioning process is designed to eliminate both
jurors who do not meet the statutory requirements for
jury service and those who are unable or unwilling to
set aside preexisting biases and remain impartial. The
Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees
all defendants the right to a speedy and public trial by
an impartial jury of their peers, and thus the judge must
determine whether service by any of the venire mem-
bers would result in a constitutional violation.
The impaneling of an impartial jury requires that
venire members answer demographic and attitudinal
questions, as well as questions regarding their familiar-
ity with the case, the litigants, and anyone else involved
in the case. Jurors who express an inability to be impar-
tial may be excused from jury service through a chal-
lenge for cause or a peremptory challenge. However, it
is possible that the judge may alternatively attempt to
“rehabilitate” biased jurors or secure public commit-
ments that they will ignore their biases. Rehabilitation
is attempted when jurors indicate that they could have
difficulty remaining impartial to both sides of the case.
These jurors may be asked if their preexisting attitudes
will interfere with their ability to be fair and follow the
law. Jurors who agree to set aside their biases and
decide the verdict based on the evidence are considered
“rehabilitated” and fit for jury service. Although the
objective of voir dire is to identify jurors who hold
opinions or biases that would make them unfit or ineli-
gible for jury service, the voir dire proceeding may also
be used for other purposes. Attorneys may attempt to
ingratiate themselves with the jury, instruct the jury on
the relevant law, or obtain public assurances from jury
members that they can be fair during voir dire.Procedural Elements of Voir Dire
The format of voir dire proceedings and the number and
scope of voir dire questions vary widely across states
and jurisdictions. The format of voir dire, the level of
attorney involvement, and the nature of questioning are
ultimately determined by the trial judge. In some
instances, only minimal voir dire is allowed, and the
judge conducts all questioning of the venire panel; attor-
neys have a minor role, and questioning is typically con-
ducted in a formal manner. In addition, the questions
are superficial in nature and primarily concern theVoir Dire——— 855V-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 855