Selecting the jury for a death penalty is different than selecting the jury for a life in prison case. Attorneys are well aware of the intended outcome being the death penalty and hand pick the jury accordingly. When becoming a member of a jury one is asked a series of questions to rule out any prejudices people might have against different groups of people According to Rita Handrich, those who interpreted the Bible literally, agreed with the statement murders deserve to be killed were more likely to be death qualified she also explains that Catholics, women and racial minorities were more likely to be excluded. Recently, the case of Timothy Tyrone Foster has been reopened due to evidence found showing prosecutors unlawfully removing black jurors from his case. Foster’s case dates back to 1987 where he set on trial in front of an all-white jury. Foster’s lawyers recently obtained the notes that were taken by prosecutors during the process of the jury selection. When his lawyers went over the notes taken they found many prejudiced statements. According to Ariane Vogue a CNN Supreme Court reporter, some of the notes contained items such as, a list labeled definite no’s, the top 5 were all black people, juror questionnaire sheets with black jurors’ race circled, and behind their name the letter “B” highlighted. Fair trials for those facing the death penalty are rare to find. Opponents will argue that if one committed a crime so horrendous that the death penalty is being sought, he/she does not deserve a fair trial. However, that is a blatant violation of the accused’s constitutional rights. If a case starts out with prejudice and unfairness it makes it extremely difficult that the final ruling could ever be one hundred percent fair. Many may say that the law states that one cannot have people on the jury who will not vote for the death penalty. The law also