A MODEL FOR TECHNIQUES OF JURY SELECTION WAS DEVELOPED FROM ANALYSIS OF SURVEYS OF POTENTIAL JURORS CONDUCTED IN CONNECTION WITH SEVERAL CRIMINAL CASES. THE MODEL SHOULD BE LIMITED TO SITUATIONS OF SERIOUS CASES THAT HAVE NOT HAD SENSATIONAL PUBLICITY. PRIOR SCREENING OF PROSPECTIVE JURORS FOR CAUSE IS ASSUMED, WITH BIAS SERVING AS THE ONLY REMAINING REASON FOR ATTORNEYS TO REMOVE A JUROR. METHODS OF DETECTING AND ELIMINATING THE EFFECTS OF PREJUDICE, WITHIN THE VOIR DIRE JUROR QUESTIONING PROCEDURE, INCLUDE CHANGING THE PLACE OF THE TRIAL IF INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS INDICATE WIDESPREAD COMMUNITY BIAS OR ASSURING THAT THE PANEL FROM WHICH THE JURY IS CHOSEN IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY. DEFENSE ATTORNEYS MUST DETERMINE WHAT KINDS OF JURORS WOULD BE MOST FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENSE AND THEN DEVELOP IN-COURT TECHNIQUES FOR ASSURING THAT SUCH PEOPLE ARE ON THE JURY. DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEYS OF JUROR CHARACTERISTICS VARY IN THEIR RESULTS, BUT EACH COMMUNITY HAS ITS OWN INDICATIONS OF THE AGES, SEX, RACE, AND ECONOMIC STATUS OF JURORS FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENSE. SUCH RESEARCH IS COSTLY, BUT EFFECTIVE, IN PRODUCING GENERAL INDICATIONS OF THE TYPE OF PERSON, BUT NOT THE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL WHO SHOULD SERVE ON THE JURY. ALTHOUGH TRADITIONALLY IGNORED BY MANY CRIMINAL LAWYERS, JUROR INVESTIGATIONS ARE REGULARLY CONDUCTED BY FEDERAL AND STATE PROSECUTORS. COURTS USUALLY HOLD THAT THE DEFENSE IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE FINDINGS OF PROSECUTOR'S INVESTIGATION, ALTHOUGH SOME COURTS HAVE HELD TO THE CONTRARY. A NETWORK OF VOLUNTEERS IN THE COMMUNITY CAN BE USEFUL AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION ON PROSPECTIVE JURORS, ESPECIALLY IN TRIALS OF POLITICAL INTEREST. THE DEFENSE MUST REFRAIN FROM INTIMIDATING JURORS DURING INTERROGATION AND MUST AVOID ANY CONTACT WITH THE JURORS' FAMILIES BEYOND THAT NECESSARY TO LEARN NEEDED INFORMATION. USE OF EXPERTS IN THE FIELDS OF PSYCHOLOGY AND COMMUNICATION MAY BE HELPFUL IN THE DETECTION OF SUBTLE BIAS IN POTENTIAL JURORS. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)