Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence

Question

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence in the country?s first two centuries. Anonymity was first employed in federal prosecutions of organized crime in New York in the 1980's. Although anonymous juries are unusual since they are typically only empanelled in organized-crime cases, its use has spread more recently to widely publicized cases, such as the federal prosecution of police officers accused of beating Rodney King and the trial of those accused of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

In these cases, attorneys selected a jury from a panel of prospective jurors whose names, addresses, ethnic backgrounds and religious affiliations remained unknown to either side. This unorthodox procedure, designed to protect jurors from outside influence and the fear of retaliation, has occasionally been employed in New York federal courts since the trial of drug kingpin Leroy "Nicky" Barnes. Despite apparent benefits, critics assail anonymous juries on the grounds that they are an infringement of the sixth amendment guarantee of an impartial jury and because they present a serious and unnecessary erosion of the presumption of innocence.

Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism. Opponents of anonymous juries argue that the procedure restricts meaningful voir dire, (questioning of the jury panel), and thereby undermines the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury. Critics also claim that jurors interpret their anonymity as proof of the defendant's criminal proclivity, thereby subverting the presumption of innocence.

However, consistent with due process and the sixth amendment, the trial judge may refuse to ask prospective jurors any questions not reasonably calculated to expose biases or prejudices relevant to the case. Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias, attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right.   1 
 1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. Enumerate reasons why anonymous juries are unconstitutional 
B. Discuss whether anonymous juries are an infringement of the sixth amendment 
C. Identify a shortcoming in a scholarly approach to jurisprudence 
D. Define the concept of anonymous juries and explore efforts taken over the last twenty years to increase their use 
E. Review strategies for ensuring that anonymous juries will not infringe on the constitutional right to a fair trial of one?s peers

2 
 2. It can be inferred from the passage that a jurors ethnic background and religious affiliation

A. Is considered by defendants not to have a significant effect on the outcome of their trials 
B. Is considered by defendants to have a significant effect on the outcome of their trials 
C. Would be unlikely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial 
D. Is considered by attorneys likely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial 
E. Is considered by attorneys unlikely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial in a widely publicized case

3 
 3. One function of the fourth paragraph of the passage is to

A. Qualify the extent to which a previously introduced viewpoint may be relevant
B. Expose the flaw in a criticism put forth in a previous paragraph
C. Introduce information that supports a theory put forth in a previous paragraph
D. Support an argument in favor of a given interpretation of a situation
E. Show the chain of reasoning that led to the conclusions of a specific study

sridharD · Answer

Though I got the answer wrong for the second question, here goes my understanding..

It can be inferred from the last line that it'll not have any effect.. so that should be our inference. Note " Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias"... The author is presenting a conflicting view here which is our inference....

Timebomb · Answer

1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. Enumerate reasons why anonymous juries are unconstitutional    Passage moreover relates to Introduction of AJ, usage of AJ, How critics view AJ, how anonymity is maintained, and AJs being in line with US laws, it is not enumerating reasons for it being unconstitutional    
B. Discuss whether anonymous juries are an infringement of the sixth amendment    Passage talks about whether anonymous juries are for/ against sixth amendment, Lets keep it   
C. Identify a shortcoming in a scholarly approach to jurisprudence    No, No shortcoming mentioned   
D. Define the concept of anonymous juries and explore efforts taken over the last twenty years to increase their use -   Passage does not narrate the efforts taken to increase their use   
E. Review strategies for ensuring that anonymous juries will not infringe on the constitutional right to a fair trial of one?s peers -    No strategies discussed - Out

Ans: B

2. It can be inferred from the passage that a jurors ethnic background and religious affiliation

A. Is considered by defendants not to have a significant effect on the outcome of their trials     Not mentioned   
B. Is considered by defendants to have a significant effect on the outcome of their trials    Close, passage does say-      Critics also claim that jurors interpret their anonymity as proof of the defendant's criminal proclivity, thereby subverting the presumption of innocence.       but this is critics claim not authors   
C. Would be unlikely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial    Passage says      Although addresses and group affiliations may indicate significant potential for bias,      something may indicate potential bias, but apparently there is no bias - lets keep it   
D. Is considered by attorneys likely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial    Not mentioned   
E. Is considered by attorneys unlikely to have a significant effect on the verdict of a trial in a widely publicized case    Not mentioned  
 
 Ans: C

RAHULAGARWAL23 · Answer

Can someone explain Why Choice A is incorrect for question no. 3 ?

My reasoning for Choice A - In the second and third paragraph the author is criticizing or giving reasons why juror anonymity isn't acceptable. In the fourth paragraph he is qualifying why the reasons or criticism given in earlier paragraphs may not be relevant.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

A says:

A. Qualify the extent to which a  previously introduced viewpoint  may be relevant.

The problem here is  "viewpoint" . There is no viewpoint is introduced in the previous paragraph; hence (A) is wrong.

Hoozan · Answer

Sajjad1994  please could you provide an explanation for Q3 (B)

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

3. One function of the fourth paragraph of the passage is to

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

To answer this question, one needs to read and understand the 3rd and 4th paragraphs. Relate both paragraphs and know what the author has trying to say and continue in paragraph 4. A and B are closest by the way.

A. Qualify the extent to which a previously introduced viewpoint may be relevant

The problem here is  "viewpoint" . There is no viewpoint is introduced in the previous paragraph; hence  (A)  is wrong.

B. Expose the  flaw  in a criticism put forth in a previous paragraph

The word  "flaw"  is important here, read the last few lines of 3rd paragraph carefully. This option looks good, keep it.

C. Introduce information  that supports a theory put forth in a previous paragraph.

No information is introduced in the fourth paragraph.

D. Support an argument in favor of a given interpretation of a situation

This is the opposite.

E. Show the chain of reasoning that led to the conclusions of a specific study

This is out of scope.

Answer: B

Bniwedita · Answer

Hi,

Can anyone please explain Q2?

Thanks

RonPurewal · Answer

Question 2 is about jurors' ethnicity and religious affiliation. "Ethnicity and religious affiliation" functions as a specific search term in this question—let's go find it and see what it's doing here.

Those items appear at the start of the second paragraph, about how the 'anonymous jury' procedure works:

So, ethnicity and religious affiliation are  two of the items kept secret from attorneys  during 'anonymous jury' selection.

To find out where to go from here, let's look at the answer choices—ALL of which are about  whether these factors will or won't affect the outcome of a trial  (and in whose opinion).

There's nothing in here about defendants' opinions.

The relevant thoughts of lawyers appear at the start of the following paragraph:

The  pink part  tells us that attorneys consider jury selection vital to the outcome of a trial.

The  purple part  tells us that the anonymous jury procedure—including the withholding of the two bits of information mentioned (ethnicity and religious affiliation of each potential juror)—reduces attorneys' power over that part of the process. Combined with the pink part, this means that the attorneys will regard this procedure as having the power to affect the trial outcome.

It's D.

Bniwedita · Answer

Thanks a lot!

Posted from my mobile device

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 2 
 
Question 2 asks us to infer something about "a jurors ethnic background and religious affiliation."

In the first sentence of paragraph 2, we learn that in some cases, "attorneys selected a jury from a panel of prospective jurors whose names, addresses, ethnic backgrounds and religious affiliations remained unknown to either side."

At the beginning of paragraph 3, the author states that, "since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism."

From this, we know that certain attorneys are not fans of the anonymous jury selection process. They think that preventing attorneys from seeing jurors' ethnic and religious information has an effect on the case.

That's why we can infer (D):
 
(D) is the correct answer to question 2.

I hope that helps!

Bniwedita · Answer

Thanks a lot!

Posted from my mobile device

elPatron434 · Answer

GMATNinja  Could you please explain why A is incorrect for Q3. A viewpoint of the attorneys is expressed in the following lines

"Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism."

However, the last paragraph says that the following to qualify the above view
"attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right."

I was stuck between A and B and did not find grounds eliminate an answer choice.

I found B correct because of the following
criticism in previous paragraph: Opponents of anonymous juries argue that the procedure restricts meaningful voir dire, (questioning of the jury panel), and thereby undermines the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury.

"Since many attorneys believe trials are frequently won or lost during jury selection, any procedure diminishing the role of counsel in the procedure necessitates close scrutiny and criticism."

flaws:However, consistent with due process and the sixth amendment, the trial judge may refuse to ask prospective jurors any questions not reasonably calculated to expose biases or prejudices relevant to the case.

"attorneys do not have an unfettered right to this information in every circumstance. Denying access to these facts may indeed constrain an attorney's ability to assemble an ideal jury, but it violates no constitutional right."

Could you please guide me on where I'm going wrong?

Thank You!

Ivy17 · Answer

Hi  Sajjad1994 ,

Could you please help me understand the difference between a 'viewpoint' and a 'criticism'? Seemingly in the 3rd para, attorneys/opponents feel that the anonymous jury selection process has certain drawbacks. Could that not be both a viewpoint and a criticism?

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 3 
 
In the third paragraph, we learn that critics consider anonymous juries a barrier to "the defendant's sixth amendment right to an impartial jury." Why? Because if juries are anonymous, this restricts questioning of the jury panel, which supposedly undermines the defendant's constitutional rights.

The fourth paragraph then argues against this point. More specifically, it argues that anonymous juries "violate no constitutional right." Why? Because trial judges may refuse to ask prospective jurors questions that are irrelevant to "biases or prejudices." So the fact that "addresses and group affiliations" of anonymous jurors are withheld doesn't necessarily violate the sixth amendment.

So overall, the purpose of the fourth paragraph is to reject the criticism of anonymous juries put forth in the third paragraph. How? By pointing out a problem with that criticism.

Let's now consider (A):

The fourth paragraph points out a problem with a criticism made in the third paragraph. So it isn't "qualifying the extent" to which a viewpoint is "relevant," but rejecting that viewpoint. More specifically, it's pointing out a problem with the viewpoint, not arguing that the viewpoint is irrelevant. Eliminate (A).

Let's consider (B):

This captures the purpose of the fourth paragraph: the criticism of anonymous juries put forth in the third paragraph is rejected because it has a flaw. So (B) is correct.

I hope that helps!

Rumadi · Answer

Regarding Question #1 , Is the passage only talking about the anonymous jurors being an infringement of the sixth amendment ?

The passage says "Despite apparent benefits, critics  assail  anonymous juries on the grounds that they are an infringement of the sixth amendment guarantee of an impartial jury  and  because they present a serious and unnecessary erosion of the presumption of innocence."

It says infringement as one of the 2 points critics are raising.

The right answer choice looks not like the main point passage but partial.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Juror anonymity was unknown to American common law and jurisprudence

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards