In People v. Tyburski, 445 Mich 606, 618-619; 518 Mich 441 (1994), defense counsel requested that the trial court ask probing questions and that the defense thereafter be allowed to ask follow-up questions; however, the trial court denied defense counsel's request. Id. at 611. Furthermore, in Tyburski, defense counsel moved for, but was denied, a new trial because of the voir dire procedures. Id. at 617-618. The Tyburski Court, at 619, held that: This Court has determined that where the trial court, rather than the attorneys, conducts voir dire, the court abuses its discretion if it does not adequately question jurors regarding potential bias so that challenges for cause, or even peremptory challenges, can be intelligently exercised. Fedorinchik v. Stewart, 289 Mich 436, 438-439; 286 NW 673 (1939). This Court has long recognized the importance of a voir dire that allows the court and the parties to discover hidden bias that would render a potential juror incompetent.