Ahmaud Arbery Case: Day 2

Blog #6

Jury Selection

It was reported that the Court in Brunswick, Georgia was going to go into the night selecting jurors, but instead the court stopped jury selection around 6 PM. 

Today, jury selection continues with general questioning by the Prosecutor, Dunikoski.  Dunikoski and the other prosecutors on the team are not from Glynn County where Ahmaud Arbery was killed.  They are instead from Cobb County.  Dunikoski seemed concerned yesterday that jurors would hold prosecutors responsible for corruption cases in and around Atlanta.  The judge, however, did not see the benefit of introducing that subject into the jury questioning.

Dunikoski did, however today, ask the prospective jurors if they had any negative feelings or weren’t going to be able to be fair because the prosecution team was not from Glynn County.  No one raised their hands.

Jurors were asked:

• If they were law enforcement personnel.
• If they knew or were related to the present DA in Glynn County.
• If they knew or were related to the former DA in Glynn County.
• Note: The former DA was indicted for her handling of the Ahmaud Arbery case and it is widely believed that she lost reelection because of this.
• Whether they knew any of the defendants (several did)
• Whether they had served on a jury and whether that jury reached a verdict.
• Whether they had had negative experiences with law enforcement (one did)
• Whether they had had bad experiences with prosecutors (the same juror had)
• Whether they had been arrested, or prosecuted for a crime (three had)
• Whether they had a close friend or relative who had been arrested, prosecuted or convicted of a crime. (eight had)
• Whether they had been a victim of a burglary or a home invasion (five had)
• Whether they had given a statement to law enforcement (gone to the police department and given a statement) (four had)
• Whether they owned a gun (11 did)
• Whether they had carried a gun as part of their work (four)
• Whether they had lived in Glynn County for less than five years.
• The DA then went through a list of witnesses and asked if the potential jurors knew any of them. 

The jury pool was asked whether because of religious or moral reasons they could not pass judgement on another person.  Three raised their hands.

Five said they belonged to no organization, religious or other.

When asked if they had ever been arrested and treated unfairly, two jurors raised their hands.

Note: Juror 69 raised his hand in a number of these questions.