Strohmeyer jury pool answers questions

The 400 prospective jurors being considered for the Jeremy Strohmeyer murder trial next month already have taken a test, but everyone involved hopes they didn't study for it.

The "test" is actually a questionnaire to determine what knowledge potential jurors have about the slaying of 7-year-old Sherrice Iverson in a Primm casino restroom on May 25, 1997, and the arrest of Strohmeyer three days later outside his Long Beach, Calif., home.

Knowing details of the well-publicized case won't necessarily prevent a person from sitting on the jury, but having drawn conclusions about guilt or innocence from media exposure likely would.

A key issue will be the ability and willingness of jurors to undergo the hardships of being sequestered in a downtown hotel during what is expected to be a six-week trial.

Chief District Judge Myron Leavitt called the panel to the courthouse last week to complete the 63-item questionnaire that should dramatically reduce the amount of time it takes to select the 12 jurors and handful of alternates.

Before attorneys first see the prospective jurors and begin grilling them about issues that may be perceived to be important, the lawyers will know a variety of details about each panelist's personal history and beliefs.

The questions, drafted by Leavitt along with defense and prosecution attorneys, are designed to help the lawyers determine which candidates might best embrace their particular positions.

The questionnaire isn't so blatant as to ask about biases and prejudices, but there are subtle inquires that can paint a picture of a juror and point lawyers toward the people they would want deciding Strohmeyer's fate.

Of course, defense and prosecution attorneys have different goals at the trial.

In addition to personal, educational and employment histories of the prospective jurors and their spouses, questions delve into religion, political leanings and law enforcement affiliations.

Prospective jurors also were asked about their favorite television shows and the last book they read and movie they watched.

Opinions were sought about psychologists, genetic influences, attorneys and lawmen and, of course, the death penalty.

Since the district attorney's office is seeking the death penalty for Strohmeyer if he is convicted of first-degree murder the questionnaire asks if the prospective juror could impose that punishment.

The questionnaire notes, however, that the death penalty is never mandatory and life-prison terms with or without the possibility of parole are optional sentences.

Since Iverson was sexually assaulted before she was strangled to death during the early morning hours as her father gambled at the Primm Valley hotel-casino, the prospective jurors were asked if anyone in their own families had been the victim of sexual molestation.

Questions also addressed the racial factor in the case. Strohmeyer is white and Iverson is black, and prosecutors have alleged as one of the six "aggravating circumstances" to legally justify the death penalty that the murder was racially motivated.

When jury selection begins on Aug. 17, jurors will be brought into Leavitt's courtroom 50 at a time for individual questioning, although defense attorneys have fumed it will be likely that information or opinions voiced by one panelist could taint others in the group.

The defense team wanted prospective jurors to be interrogated individually behind closed doors, but prosecutors argued that process was unnecessary and would extend the selection process for weeks.

While the panelists have not yet been interviewed, they already are feeling the pressure of their potential job. Leavitt instructed them at the end of the questionnaire that from that point on, they are prohibited from reading or watching any media accounts of the case.

archive