San Francisco, CA commercial litigation attorney Edward Hugo explains how virtual jury selection differs from live jury selection. He shares that he has selected over a hundred live juries and has now conducted four virtual jury selections, and he explains the stark differences. In a virtual setting, even when narrowed down, all you see are little faces in boxes—sometimes not even full faces—and it’s difficult to know what jurors are doing. For instance, one juror might be working at an auto repair shop, or another might be watching the trial from his car on his phone.

Virtual jury selection is not a one-person job. No single set of eyes can monitor all potential jurors on the screen or those off-screen simultaneously. Multiple people trained in jury selection are necessary to observe jurors while the attorney asks questions (voir dire). In a live setting, you can ask one juror about their opinions, then immediately ask the group if they share similar views. In a virtual setting, that interaction is nearly impossible.

The lack of formal rules and structure in virtual jury selection further complicates matters. Jurors are often distracted—they may be shopping online, caring for pets, answering the door, or otherwise disengaged. Attention and honesty, which are naturally enforced in a courtroom, are difficult to achieve remotely. Consequently, attorneys have a limited window to evaluate each juror individually, and once that interaction ends, the opportunity to assess them is gone.

He emphasizes the need for a “divide and conquer” approach: some team members focus on off-screen jurors, tracking who is paying attention, while others handle the on-screen interactions. Social research and jury questionnaires become even more critical, given the reduced physical observation time.

He shares some memorable examples of virtual jury challenges: one juror joined Zoom while driving from the Juror Commissioner’s office to her home, another worked out on an elliptical, some were cooking, sleeping, or distracted by deliveries. All of these situations make it extremely difficult to ensure jurors are fully engaged in the process.