"If You Throw a Skunk into the Jury Box, You Can't Instruct the Jury Not to Smell It"

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Volokh, E. (2026, October 16). "If You Throw a Skunk into the Jury Box, You Can't Instruct the Jury Not to Smell It". Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/10/16/if-you-throw-a-skunk-into-the-jury-box-you-cant-instruct-the-jury-not-to-smell-it/

Dated from the outlet's own feed. Check the original for its byline.

Reason · collected 2026-10-16 · by Eugene Volokh

Quick Summary

The title of the piece references a metaphorical saying used by lawyers, which dates back to at least 1931 and is mentioned in Dunn v. U.S., a case from 1962. The phrase suggests that once irrelevant or prejudicial information has been introduced into a trial, it cannot be ignored by the jury. The article does not provide additional context beyond noting its usage in legal discourse over several decades.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-10-17, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

Eugene Volokh from Reason Magazine referenced a piece of colorful lawyer wisdom in an article dated October 16, 2026. The phrase "If you throw a skunk into the jury box, you can't instruct the jury not to smell it" has been used since at least 1931 and is exemplified in Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962). This metaphor suggests that once evidence is introduced into a trial, attempts to ignore or suppress its impact are futile. Volokh notes the phrase's longevity and widespread use in legal contexts over several decades.

Written for “Skunk In Jury Box Analogy” on 2026-10-17, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
This article does not take a side on a contested political question, so it has no leaning score. That is an answer rather than a gap: a match report or a rescue can be warmly or critically written without being left or right, and scoring it anyway is how approval of a subject gets recorded as a political position.
No political leaning scored for article 86075 · logged 2026-10-17

Story

📰 Skunk In Jury Box Analogy
Crime & Law · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
1
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
100%
1 of 1 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Crime & Law
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-10-17 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 780 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
147 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Some colorful lawyer wisdom (see, e.g., Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962)); I found versions of this in newspapers going back to 1931, though it may have been a familiar phrase even then.
🔮 The dictionary definition of "refuse" cited by Nunes includes this meaning: "to show or express an unwillingness to do or comply with."
🔮 [Under Pennsylvania precedent,] [A] court may prohibit a parent from advocating religious beliefs, which, if acted upon, would constitute a crime.
🔮 Even in First Amendment cases, where the facial-challenge bar is lower than it otherwise might be, the plaintiff [in a facial challenge] must show that "a substantial number of [the law's] applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep."
🔮 Officers who violate the law may be criminally prosecuted by the State.
🔮 The standard for the granting of Pseudonym status can be found in Practice Book § 11–20A(h)(1) which provides in pertinent part: "Pseudonyms may be used in place of the name of a party or parties only with the prior approval of the judicial authority and only if the judicial authority concludes that such order is necessary to preserve an interest which is determined to override the public's interest in knowing the name of the party or parties.
🔮 It would hold up only if websites have an inherent expressive value that differs from the expressive value inherent in all books.
🔮 While any one of FirstBank's services to Epstein may be claimed to be "routine" (though in many instances even that is suspicious), together, the complaint alleges that FirstBank was deeply enmeshed in Epstein's misconduct for its own financial benefit….
🔮 We hold that some predicate crimes (like Bost's conviction for terroristic threats) demonstrate a prima facie risk of physical violence from misusing guns and that those convicted of such crimes may presumptively be disarmed based on those convictions alone….
🔮 However, when it came to Pride events, the newsroom was deviating from its typical editorial review process, and many reporters were beginning to go cover stories about Pride festivals as soon as they heard that the event was taking place—without discussing with the rest of the newsroom whether the story ought to be covered, whether it was duplicative of another story that had recently aired, or whether some unique aspect of the story could be explored in a way that highlighted the story's overall newsworthiness.
Also by Eugene Volokh
Open Thread
2026-10-16 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 147 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

U.S.(5th

Subjects

Dunn PERSON · 1× U.S.(5th GPE · 1×

Narrative

Some colorful lawyer wisdom (see, e.g., Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962)); I found versions of this in newspapers going back to 1931, though it may have been a familiar phrase even then.
framing: speculative · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-10-17
🔮 Some colorful lawyer wisdom (see, e.g., Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962)); I found versions of this in newspapers going back to 1931, though it may have been a familiar phrase even then.

Claims (1 extracted, 1 hedged)

Some colorful lawyer wisdom (see, e.g., Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962)); I found versions of this in newspapers going back to 1931, though it may have been a familiar phrase even then. uncertain
it → see → 1931
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support