Jury selection in the case of The People of the State of California v Parthenia Carr was a study in contrast. Prosecutor John Aki, chose to address the jury as a single body, using the Socrates method. Defense Attorney Blankenship chose to focus on each juror, asking questions one-on-one. Those styles continued throughout the trial, from opening statements to closing arguments with a few detours in between. And more than occasional disagreements. The two sides entered into the trial with a cordial relationship. By its end, they would barely be speaking to each other.
Before the trial begun, the lawyers, along with presiding Judge Paul Zellerbach discussed the logistics of the testimonies of both Claude Carr, currently a resident at Ironwood State Prison and his half-brother Steve Woodruff, who was awaiting trial for capital murder in relation to the shooting of Riverside Police Department Detective Doug Jacobs. At issue was the Fifth Amendment, and the right of each person not to testify to anything that might incriminate them in terms of separate criminal cases. Claude Carr had been on parole when the shooting occurred and after giving his statement to the police detectives, his parole was violated and he was sent back to prison. He also faced charges of resisting arrest in connection to Jacobs, but had not been arraigned in misdemeanor court yet.
Blankenship wanted to call Claude Carr to testify for the defense and potentially Woodruff as well. Zellerbach wanted both men to come into court outside the presence of the jury, and state on the record, if they did intend to testify. He also dictated that a public defender would be assigned to council Claude Carr to determine whether he should testify. Woodruff was discussed next, especially since Blankenship said at a couple points,