How has the voir dire process been conducted for jury selection in a murder trial?

Nothing in the juror questionnaires or voir dire indicates that any of these jurors had formed an opinion regarding defendant's guilt or were otherwise biased against him. Although a preexisting opinion is not disqualifying if the juror can set the opinion aside and decide the case solely on the evidence presented in court [citation], these jurors did not even present that issue. ( People v. Avila, supra, 59 Cal.4th at p. 512, 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 718, 327 P.3d 821.) A few of the jurors were slightly acquainted with some of the potential witnesses or had heard of the victim or her family, but nothing suggests this would bias them.

Defendant claims that during voir dire, the jurors were not asked questions which were calculated to elicit the disclosure of the existence of actual prejudice, the degree to which the jurors had been exposed to prejudicial publicity, and how such exposure had affected the jurors' attitude towards the trial. [Citation.] Instead, leading questions and conclusionary answers were typical of the manner in which [the] voir dire was conducted. He did not object on this basis, so the contention is forfeited. ( People v. Freeman (1994) 8 Cal.4th 450, 487, 34 Cal.Rptr.2d 558, 882 P.2d 249.) Moreover, the record is to the contrary. The court carefully inquired into these matters and allowed both parties to ask any additional questions they wished. The two examples defendant cites to support his claim do not do so.