Known as voir dire, the process allows the presiding judge and two legal teams to question prospective jurors before the trial begins to identify possible bias and conflicts that could impede their ability to adjudicate the case in a “fair and impartial” way.
Richard Gabriel, president of litigation strategy firm Decision Analysis, said the high-profile nature of the case, eight years in the making, and its links to both China and Iran elevated the stakes of voir dire for both sides.
“Given the nature of the case, its pre-trial publicity and potential international ramifications, they seemed to want to ask [prospective jurors] many questions to get a better sense of where they are coming from,” he said, referring to a questionnaire that was circulated among hundreds of prospective jurors before the trial.