The stage at which jury duty notices are sent out should be automated and "random". Actual jury selection is done by the lawyers on both sides, who mutally agree on jurors for the case based on perceived lack of bias towards one position or the other.
The selection part is random, and the so-called biased people are often don't make it to the point of serving. Also, college graduates are disproportionally not used either. I asked my law professor why that was and he honestly said he likes to be able to work with a blank slate, or more of one.
When we started to work on the part of evidence and working towards convincing juries/judge, a lot of the fancy double-talk we learned could still be seen through by many people who went to college, usually.
Overall, his Harvard training was towards working with those who were less educated and "easier" to convince. That being said, his supervisor he spoke many accolades of didn't have a college degree and went to an unaccredited law school, and isn't traditionally educated, but considered one of the top prosecutors in the county.
Sometimes you may get a case thinking that it's too difficult for the jury and you can mold their belief as to what happened and that the outcome will be predictable. Just when you think you have everything you need to convince the jury, they don't bite and instead you get bit in the butt.
If I were a prosecutor or defense counsel, and the case was a construction one, I wouldn't use someone in that industry like Rodimus Prime in the jury (see above) as it would be far too much work to convince a jury. If there were more than one construction/building professional on the jury, that could be a real mess. As soon as any lawyer (or lawyer not previously in the construction field with basic knowledge) opens their mouth, they will be seen as an idiot to the jury of construction professionals.
