When is a juror considered biased concerning their ability to serve on a jury?

A juror is considered biased concerning their ability to serve on a jury in multiple scenarios, all of which are covered in the choices. Each of the situations listed—having a friendship with one of the parties, having previously expressed an opinion about the case, and having a financial interest in the outcome—demonstrates a potential conflict that could affect the juror's ability to impartially evaluate the evidence and render a fair verdict.

A friendship with a party involved in the case may influence a juror’s objectivity, as personal relationships can create an affinity that clouds judgment. Similarly, expressing a prior opinion about the case indicates that a juror may have preconceived notions that could impede their ability to remain neutral. Finally, financial interests in the outcome create a direct conflict that could sway a juror’s decision-making based on personal gain rather than impartial assessment of the facts.

Thus, all of these factors contribute to a juror's bias, affirming that they would not be able to fulfill their duty to fairly adjudicate the matter brought before them. The presence of any one of these biases is sufficient to question a juror's impartiality, which is why the answer encompasses all these scenarios collectively.