Juror evaluation requires collection and analysis of all information available in the courtroom, such as verbal responses to questions, nonverbal cues, background and personality characteristics, interactions with the attorneys, judge, client, and other prospective jurors, and the individual's likely contribution to the jury as a group. Because this is a complex process, a team approach using a consultant or co-workers is recommended. This method also uses various numerical ratings for different characteristics to simplify observation and assessment. The paper describes demographic and attitude rating systems and then identifies information that can be obtained from responses to questions on demographics. A sample evaluation traces the process of questioning and deciding whether to exercise a peremptory challenge against a juror whose responses contained almost no explicit statements of his attitudes and opinions. Ways to identify the authoritarian personality are explored, since such individuals often defer to the judge and prosecutor, cannot apply the presumption of innocence, and are prone to convict. Nonverbal indicators of attitudes, personality, and candidness are also reviewed, with attention to body posture, hand movement, facial expressions, and eye contact. The discussion of group dynamics considers the roles that probable leaders, followers, fillers, negotiators, and holdouts play in jury decisionmaking. The article concludes with a juror evaluation checklist and a case study where systematic jury selection techniques were used in a first degree murder trial. Diagrams and 41 footnotes are included.