with regard to jury selection. i'm not saying the judge has done anything improper, but what often happens in jury selection is you ask who here cannot be fair and impartial, people raise their hand, then you have follow-up, if i explain the law to you, are you telling me you're going to disregard the law or can you set your bias aside and sit and hear the evidence on this case and be fair and impartial, people often say yes and then it is a battle about who can rehabilitate those people or get them stricken for a reason that says they can't comply with the law. you take that out and excuse jurors when they raise their hands, things are going to move much for quickly than they normally would. >> and so, what would you think is probably the -- what would be the better way to sift through these people? >> i can tell you what i think the better way is for the perspective of a trial lawyer. a trial lawyer, you want more time to spend talking with the jurors. the only way you get that is to spend time talking to them