Judge

And if it's a question that clearly cannot be asked, I won't ask it. They ask for a defendant's prior record, and it's not relevant. I just won't ask the question. If they ask if it was raining that day or if – Any other blood was found in any other spot than was testified to. Then I'll ask the question. The witness will face the jury when answering.

And if it's a question that clearly cannot be asked, I won't ask it. They ask for a defendant's prior record, and it's not relevant. I just won't ask the question. If they ask if it was raining that day or if – Any other blood was found in any other spot than was testified to. Then I'll ask the question. The witness will face the jury when answering.

Then finally, the lawyers will have the chance to redirect or recross if they feel they need to develop the testimony any further to clarify the witness's answers for the jurors.

Then finally, the lawyers will have the chance to redirect or recross if they feel they need to develop the testimony any further to clarify the witness's answers for the jurors.

Then finally, the lawyers will have the chance to redirect or recross if they feel they need to develop the testimony any further to clarify the witness's answers for the jurors.

Oh, there's many of them. It keeps jurors more engaged in the process. I mean, think about sitting in a classroom where you can't ask questions. If the students can't ask questions, how much of that are they really learning? As far as the actual significant weighty reasons, I think that it's a good idea to let jurors ask questions. They make more informed decisions.

Oh, there's many of them. It keeps jurors more engaged in the process. I mean, think about sitting in a classroom where you can't ask questions. If the students can't ask questions, how much of that are they really learning? As far as the actual significant weighty reasons, I think that it's a good idea to let jurors ask questions. They make more informed decisions.

Oh, there's many of them. It keeps jurors more engaged in the process. I mean, think about sitting in a classroom where you can't ask questions. If the students can't ask questions, how much of that are they really learning? As far as the actual significant weighty reasons, I think that it's a good idea to let jurors ask questions. They make more informed decisions.

Absolutely. They're questions that people from outside the system would be curious about. How does blood spatter tell the story? What does DNA really mean? How long can it last?

Absolutely. They're questions that people from outside the system would be curious about. How does blood spatter tell the story? What does DNA really mean? How long can it last?

Absolutely. They're questions that people from outside the system would be curious about. How does blood spatter tell the story? What does DNA really mean? How long can it last?

The concerns that have been communicated to me from lawyers that I do respect talk about how they're concerned that the ability for jurors to ask questions may change. lessen the state's burden that, say, a prosecutor forgets to ask a question or ask in a certain way, then a juror can come back and ask the question.

The concerns that have been communicated to me from lawyers that I do respect talk about how they're concerned that the ability for jurors to ask questions may change. lessen the state's burden that, say, a prosecutor forgets to ask a question or ask in a certain way, then a juror can come back and ask the question.

The concerns that have been communicated to me from lawyers that I do respect talk about how they're concerned that the ability for jurors to ask questions may change. lessen the state's burden that, say, a prosecutor forgets to ask a question or ask in a certain way, then a juror can come back and ask the question.

Another one that came up is that if a juror's question isn't asked, it might cause the juror to speculate about the withheld answer or resent their question not being asked. Maybe they think the lawyers are hiding something.

Another one that came up is that if a juror's question isn't asked, it might cause the juror to speculate about the withheld answer or resent their question not being asked. Maybe they think the lawyers are hiding something.

Another one that came up is that if a juror's question isn't asked, it might cause the juror to speculate about the withheld answer or resent their question not being asked. Maybe they think the lawyers are hiding something.

I don't think so. Hung juries are possible if the jury does not have enough information for sure. Gaps in the proof, we'll call it. Allowing juries to ask questions doesn't change the proof. If the gaps were there before, they're still there at all.

I don't think so. Hung juries are possible if the jury does not have enough information for sure. Gaps in the proof, we'll call it. Allowing juries to ask questions doesn't change the proof. If the gaps were there before, they're still there at all.

I don't think so. Hung juries are possible if the jury does not have enough information for sure. Gaps in the proof, we'll call it. Allowing juries to ask questions doesn't change the proof. If the gaps were there before, they're still there at all.