because the stakes were very high.  It involved a 46-year-old woman who had had a biopsy at Westchester Medical Center for a (benign, it turned out) breast tumor.  She had general anesthesia and not only was she given an overdose, she was also not monitored.  She is now in a vegetative state.  These facts were accepted by all parties, the award was going to be enormous, and the only question was who was to blame.  There were two lawyers on one side, representing the victim and her husband, and five on the other, representing two anesthesiologists, the surgeon, the hospital and resident, etc.  I don't know which side rejected me, my husband, a very experienced emergency room head nurse, and economic analyst, a woman who ran a family business, a mailman who made some intelligent and perceptive comments, etc.  The three people left had demonstrated a striking lack of intelligence.  We were all questioned at length, both in the room and in another room where at some points some of us were called to answer questions privately.  The lawyers had every opportunity to evaluate us and their criterion for accepting jurors was clear.  This was going to be a dumb jury.  

I may email you after reading the book.