Advertisement

Court of Fast Resort : Teen-Age Attorneys Grill Potential Jurors and Quickly Seat Panel in Simulation of Simpson Case at Valley Magnet School

SPECIAL TO THE TIMES

Judge Lance A. Ito certainly would have been frustrated by the teen-age attorneys’ lack of courtroom savvy. But he would have been thrilled by their speed: Twelve jurors and two alternates were picked in the time it would take to dissect a frog.

In contrast, four weeks after beginning jury selection, the real attorneys in the O.J. Simpson murder trial are still at it.

On Tuesday, would-be barristers at James Monroe High School in the mid-San Fernando Valley grilled would-be jurors about their ability to rule fairly in the Simpson trial. And if Simpson’s freedom wasn’t truly on the line, good grades were--and questioning in the school’s Law and Government Magnet program was fierce.

Advertisement

“You stated that you thought O.J. Simpson was a good man and incapable of committing such a crime. Why?” shot prosecutor Kristi Harty, 15.

“Well,” 16-year-old potential juror Steve Ross replied sheepishly, “he looks like a good man.”

Juror dismissed.

To explore one of the least understood aspects of a criminal trial, the students were mimicking the jury selection process now taking place at the Downtown Criminal Courts Building.

The magnet program focuses on course work ranging from criminal forensics to politics and often features guest seminars by attorneys and politicians.

Advertisement

On Tuesday, an appropriately somber “Judge” Bill Hence (a criminal law teacher at the North Hills school who is awaiting the results of his own bar exam) presided. Attorneys, wearing chic business dresses and three-piece suits but still battling acne, examined and cross-examined potential jurors who had to be home at 10 on school nights.

The potential jurors had already filled out an abridged version of the actual Simpson jury questionnaire, and both the defense and prosecution were poised to pounce on any bias in the surveys that they felt went against their case.

You want unbiased jurors, said prosecutor Amy Messigian, 14, so long as they are a little more unbiased toward your side.

Advertisement

Would one juror’s status as a USC football fan get in the way of convicting heroic alumnus Simpson, Harty asked.

“First of all, Mr. Simpson played before I was born,” the youthful juror began.

Defense attorneys Antonio Moore and Kaz Gohlke could hardly wait to dismiss one juror who felt that Simpson’s real defense team was “kissing up” to Judge Ito by constantly referring to him as “your honor” and saying “please and thank you” so often.

If moments in the proceedings were refreshingly free of legal machinations--and even had “Judge” Hence fighting a grin--many of the questions struck at the heart of the case, and of its possible social implications.

A Latina juror was asked if the Los Angeles riots of 1992 had altered her attitudes toward African Americans. Another was asked a similar question after noting on her questionnaire that she had once been followed by a black man. And the prosecution especially sought out those with a strong belief in the reliability of DNA testing.

Whereas the real trial has taken on an air of sensationalism and involves two grisly slayings, it is also perfect for such a mock jury selection, said teacher Mark Elinson.

“It’s the one time we’ve had the opportunity to deal with a case everyone is familiar with,” he said.

Advertisement

That might be an overstatement. One of the would-be jurors set off a flurry of giggles when he conceded that he had no idea who O.J. Simpson is.

“I’m not much of a football fan,” he said.

Advertisement