> That the defense didn't object to this, or ask the alternate ("Does anyone in here intrinsically trust the police?") perplexes me.
Actually, it didn't occur to me. You made it sound very simple but I didn't see it as a possibility at all. So if someone says yes, we just throw them out of the jury. Now I think this should be a standard question for any case where the police is a witness.
Well, on second thought, we will probably still need a sympathetic judge if we are throwing out someone "with cause". There are only so many we can throw out without a cause.
I thought this was commonly asked, but maybe it varies by state. In my city in Pennsylvania we get a standardized form that does ask this question. It states, "Would you be more likely to believe the testimony of a police officer or any other law enforcement officer because of his or her job?" [1]
So what kind of answer are they expecting for that question? I genuinely can't tell. It seems obvious to me that people who answer "yes" should be excluded, yet I feel the opposite is true.
