All about flooble | fun stuff | Get a free chatterbox | Free JavaScript | Avatars    
perplexus dot info

Home > Logic
Jury selection (Posted on 2003-03-13) Difficulty: 2 of 5
In the jury selection phase of a murder trial, one of the attorneys asked a prospective juror:

"Would you be able to enter a guilty verdict if you knew that such a verdict would condemn the defendant to death?"

The person replied: "No. I beleive that human life is the most important thing, and must be preserved above all else."

The lawyer asked: "So you will hold to this even though it may keep you off this jury?"

"Yes," the person replied.

How did the lawyer know he was lying?

See The Solution Submitted by levik    
Rating: 2.5000 (8 votes)

Comments: ( Back to comment list | You must be logged in to post comments.)
re: Is it a lie? | Comment 2 of 18 |
(In reply to by )

(Sorry, hit the enter key by mistake last time.)

A person who believed in protecting human life above all else might not admit this, just so he could get on the jury and thereby save that person from a death sentence. However, if the person did not think through the implications of admitting this belief to the lawyer (the implications being that he would most likely be excused from jury duty and miss his opportunity to prevent a death sentence), he could make both statements in complete honesty. In short, he may not be lying.
  Posted by Bryan on 2003-03-13 08:30:26

Please log in:
Login:
Password:
Remember me:
Sign up! | Forgot password


Search:
Search body:
Forums (2)
Newest Problems
Random Problem
FAQ | About This Site
Site Statistics
New Comments (10)
Unsolved Problems
Top Rated Problems
This month's top
Most Commented On

Chatterbox:
Copyright © 2002 - 2020 by Animus Pactum Consulting. All rights reserved. Privacy Information