This best captures the idea that juries can’t be expected to ignore information they learned outside the courtroom. Some critics think it’s beyond the jury’s ability to filter out things they learned before trial and to make sure their decisions aren’t influenced by those things.

This doesn’t capture the idea of ignoring things the jury learned outside the courtroom. Pretrial speculation isn’t information the jury learned outside the courtroom. Rather, it’s hypothesizing and theorizing about what might be true.

This doesn’t capture the idea of ignoring things the jury learned outside the courtroom. The phrase we’re asked about is part of a critic’s response to specific instructions given by judges to juries. That instruction isn’t that jurors shouldn’t form an opinion before trial; it’s that jurors should ignore information they learned outside the court.

This doesn’t capture the idea of ignoring things the jury learned outside the courtroom. The phrase we’re asked about is part of a critic’s response to specific instructions given by judges to juries. That instruction isn’t that jurors should try to accurately identify how much knowledge they have about the case. The instruction is to ignore information they learned outside the courtroom. Their assessment of how much information they have from outside the courtroom is irrelevant. However much that information is, jurors are supposed to ignore it.

This doesn’t capture the idea of ignoring things the jury learned outside the courtroom. The phrase we’re asked about is part of a critic’s response to specific instructions given by judges to juries. That instruction isn’t that jurors should protect themselves from pretrial information. It’s that they should ignore information they learn outside the courtroom. There’s a difference between trying to avoid learning information and ignoring information that one has learned.