The integrity of jury verdicts

Public confidence in the integrity of jury verdicts and the justice system as a whole is eroded by stories of irresponsible Internet behavior, such as the juror who conducted a survey on Facebook seeking input as to what her verdict should be in a trial she was serving on. Or by the reporting of a juror who tweeted that he just gave away millions of dollars of “someone else’s money”, warning his followers not to buy the defendant’s stock. Or where a trial involving toxic leaks revealed that jurors were researching groundwater contamination during the trial. The best business attorney is an expert of business law in California.

There are now stories of unidentified persons “planting” false stories in pending trials, ostensibly hoping that jurors might stumble on them. Included have been false confessions or false allegations of misconduct against one of the parties. It has also never been hard to find YouTube videos making a case for juror-nullification. Jurors who think their thoughts/ comments/positions might end up on another juror’s blog may also be inhibit-ed in the free flow discussion that is the hallmark of jury deliberations. The chilling effect is something that cannot be measured and should not be discounted.

Multitasking has long been proven in study after study to show that the many tasks being done concurrently are not being done very well. The same applies to jurors. Those who are constantly checking their Facebook pages or other sites, even if unrelated to the trial, are not giving the parties and the attorneys their full attention. It is not uncommon to see heads bobbing down as jurors quietly check their smartphones low in their laps...or even inside their pockets as their fingers move over the sight of the key unseen.

Why are jurors ignoring or skating the increasingly strident admonitions regularly issued by courts? There are many excuses. “Everyone is doing it.” “You are Googling us, why can’t we Google you?” “Sorry, just habit.” “The judge said no tweeting but never said anything about no blogging.” “This is not ‘research.’” “I am only announcing, I was not discussing anything.” “I was curious.” “I am being the best juror possible.” “Any responsible and rational juror would seek additional information on their own since the object of any court proceeding is to use all facts obtainable to determine the truth.” “You better believe I will do whatever research is required to unravel this case using due diligence.” “This was private!”