Final answer:
The veil of ignorance is a philosophical concept from Rawls's theory of justice, which ensures ethical decision-making for structuring a just society, not to be confused with juror impartiality in a courtroom.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement as phrased is false. The veil of ignorance is not about not knowing the offender's victim to be fair in a trial. Rather, it's a concept from philosophical reasoning about justice, specifically from Rawls's theory of justice. The veil of ignorance is a method to ensure impartiality in ethical decision-making. Under the veil, one would make decisions about the structure of society without knowing their own position in it. This ensures that policies are fair to all, as decision-makers would not want to disadvantage any particular group they might end up belonging to. It is an attempt to eliminate personal biases and create just structures in society, rather than a directive for juror behavior in a courtroom setting.
John Rawls introduced the veil of ignorance in his work to address societal issues and fairness. While it does serve as an analogy to the ideal of a juror approaching a case without biases, its main purpose is to provide a framework for designing just institutions and fair distribution of resources and opportunities, regardless of one's social status.