But one thing during this, during the O.J. Simpson trial, and we always refer to that,

they spent so much time on the DNA evidence that the jury was falling asleep.

Because it's such a complicated area of evidence.

So it might be that you would almost need someone with more education to sit and

listen as if they were in like a lecture hall being lectured to about certain type of evidence

because they're else they're going to be bored to tears and it's going to go over their head

and you're going to lose them. That's just my opinion, Mike. No, it's true. I will also say Judge Edo, Lance Edo, lost control of that case

because they were only taking testimony, I think at one point two hours a day. And so it went on

far longer than it should have. And DNA was in its infancy, really, when you think about it.

And they wasted a lot of people's time.

They bored people to death.

And I think people just tuned, you know, what do they call it, tune out and drop out

or whatever, you know, intellectually.

And I think they did that.

I think you're absolutely right.

If you're going to have a highly technical presentation by the prosecution or defense,

you're going to want someone who maybe has gone to college. If you're going to talk about,

say, you're going to bring in autism and, you know, later on, you're going to want somebody

maybe who went to college and took a course in psychology and at least has heard of these words and these things that they might not teach in a high school.

You're right. It seems a little bit snobby, but occasionally it comes in handy to figure out what is this, you know, what is this person capable of understanding?

You know, one of the big considerations in this case also is that the jury, whoever they may be, and again, the jury is going to be 12 jurors and eight alternates.

So a total of 20 jurors, they're going to be sitting for probably four months.

...