Alternative Juror's Participation in Deliberations Leads to a New Trial in Manslaughter Convictions

The Indiana Supreme Court in Wall v. Indiana has granted a husband and wife, who were both convicted of manslaughter, new trials because an alternate juror participated in deliberations. Apparently, this juror not only participated but also became very involved in the deliberations.  According to the state high court,

[e]ven after being informed by other jurors not to participate in the deliberations, the alternate juror

manipulated physical evidence (the working parts of a baby gate) and repeatedly replayed a portion of the DVD that was in evidence, with ever-increasing volume, until all jurors were giving it their attention

 

Interestingly, not every member of the Indiana Supreme Court thought that the defendants should automatically receive a new trial.  At least one dissenting justice argued that the case should be remanded so that the trial judge can poll the jurors to determine the impact of the alternate juror’s misconduct on their respective impartiality.