The jury that begins deliberating today represents a wide "cross-section of the community," according to Dubin.
Of the approximately 2,000 jurors initially summoned, 188 answered a detailed voir dire about their backgrounds, education level, families and potential biases. The questions addressed a range of issues including whether the potential jurors had ever been bullied, held biases based on race or sexual orientation, or experienced personal roommate issues.
"You don't have the ability to select anyone," said Dubin, "Jury selection is the wrong name for this. It should be jury de-selection. You only have the ability to knock off [potential jurors.]"
The defense's de-selection strategy generally favored people who were single and parents whose children were teenagers or fully grown. These parents are more understanding of "immature" behavior and how rumors spread around a dorm, according to Dubin, while parents of young children are "in a much more protective mode."
With experience in dozens of high profile cases including the recent acquittal of the "Gotti" Lorenzo brothers, Dubin believes that jurors will eventually ask themselves the question: "It might have been really immature, but should this kid go to jail?"
The jurors listened to the numerous witnesses who said that Ravi had never said anything negative or derogatory about gays, a standard which is necessary to support the bias intimidation charges.
"It takes a lot of courage, after an assumption of guilt in the media, to assume innocence as a juror," said Dubin, "But there is no bias in this case and he didn't mean to intimidate anyone."
Dubin predicts a verdict from the jury by Friday.