One of the most publicized court cases in history was the O.J. Simpson murder trial. It was so forefront to the eyes of the world, that the media dubbed it "the trial of the century"; and that was an accurate assessment. Going through the process of selecting the jury who would watch, listen and process the trial was a complex issue, and the publicity - and secrecy - surrounding it kept a captivated audience of millions. A jury needs to be fair and impartial, but with the amount of information televised about the case it was worried that the jury would have too much exposure to this information. It can be easy to see how this was a worry due to the fact that the police chase of O.J. Simpson in a white Ford Bronco had been broadcast as an interruption to the NBA Finals that year. This extensive coverage led most individuals to have their own idea on whether or not O.J. Simpson was guilty or not of the murders that he was accused of, so it did appear almost impossible to find a perfect jury that would allow for a decision to be based on the evidence that was presented by both sides rather than the general public's opinion on how the case should be decided. O.J. Simpson's defense team had an advantage when it came to trying to select a jury for his trial. "Cases like O.J. Simpson's, Michael Jackson's, and Kobe Bryant's raise troubling ethical questions. In each case, wealthy clients had the advantage of psychological jury selection, something most people cannot afford" (Coon and Mitterer, 2006, p. 682). O.J. Simpson was not only able to afford a large legal team to be able to work on his case, but was also able to hire a jury consultant, Jo-Ellan Dimitrius. A jury consultant will help to determine what individuals will make up the most advantageous jury to be seated in order to try to use psychology to influence the verdict to go in their favor. Although this does sound a little shadowy, it is a legal process that both the defen