Juries

Juror Misconduct in the Ghislane Maxwell Trial

Professor Stephen Carter, in an article for Bloomberg, discusses the challenges of getting a criminal conviction overturned because of juror misconduct.

Bloomberg: Ghislaine Maxwell’s Conviction Can Survive a Juror’s Disclosure

Jurors Easily Distracted During Virtual Jury Selection

Defendants in an asbestos trial recently filed a motion for mistrial claiming that the online voir dire process was flawed.  According to the defendants, many jurors were either absent or distracted during voir dire.  The distractions ranged from jurors working out to herding pets and children to multitasking with other electronic devices.  While many have welcomed the idea of online jury selection, this motion illustrates the challenges of keeping jurors engaged. 

To read more about the motion see the article below.

ABAJournal.com: Potential jurors exercised, curled up on bed during virtual voir dire, motion says in asbestos case

 

The Holy Spirit Juror and Former Congresswoman Corrine Brown

Interesting opinion out of the 11th Circuit as reported by the ABA Journal.

A federal judge didn’t err when he dismissed a juror who declared that the Holy Spirit told him a former congresswoman was innocent in an alleged charity scam, a federal appeals court has ruled in a 2-1 decision.

In a Jan. 9 opinion, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Atlanta upheld the conviction of Corrine Brown, a former Democratic congresswoman from Florida....to continue reading go here.

Juror's Numerous Text Messages Causes Murder Conviction to be Overturned

NY Times:

On the day of the verdict, an alternate juror contacted a lawyer for Mr. Neulander. That led to the revelation that one of the jurors who had voted to convict him of murder had exchanged 7,000 text messages with family and friends during the three-week trial.

Hundreds of the texts involved aspects of the case, a clear violation of the judge’s standard admonition that jurors not discuss the matter until after the trial was over....to continue reading go here.

People v. Neulander, 2019 NY Slip Op 07521

How Far is Too Far? (Bostick v. State Farm)

That is the question many have asked with regards to how jurors treat each other. In one recent federal civil case, Bostick v. State Farm, a juror was dismissed by the trial judge for engaging in the following conduct:

• Confronting a male juror “chest to chest and threatening to punch him out.”

• Remarking that he was “going to hit someone” and goading other jurors to “swing on me.”

• Using the F-word, calling Caucasian jurors “white asses,” and referring to female jurors as “bitches.”

• “[Resting] on the couch during most of their deliberations.”

• Stating that he didn’t want to follow instructions. When he was urged to follow the law he replied, “I don’t care.”

• Interrupting and ignoring jurors and refusing to deliberate.

• Frightening jurors and causing two female jurors to cry.

The 11th Circuit in an 11-page opinion affirmed the dismissal finding that jurors have been removed for far less egregious conduct.

 

Defense Attorneys for El Chapo File Motion for Retrial

Defense attorneys for El Chapo have filed their motion for retrial based on juror misconduct.  To access the motion go here.  For news articles on the filing go here.

Jurors and Social Media

Yesterday, I went on NPR's Press Play, hosted by Madeleine Brand, to discuss jurors, El Chapo, and social media.  I was on the air with Keegan Hamilton of VICE News.  He was the reporter who originally broke the story about juror misconduct in El Chapo's trial.  The interview lasts approximately 10 minutes and is available here.

Allegations of Juror Misconduct in El Chapo Trial

According to a recent article in VICE, the jurors in the El Chapo trial allegedly followed the case in the media and shared their views with others about the trial.  If true, this is definitely juror misconduct.  However, it remains to be seen whether the misconduct, even if true, would be sufficient to overturn El Chapo's guilty verdict.  The standard to do so is very high.

I do believe that the use of anonymous juries, such as in the case of El Chapo, increases the likelihood of juror misconduct for two reasons.  First, it is harder for attorneys and the media to research/investigate jurors when they are anonymous.  Second, jurors are more likely to flaunt the rules when they know it will be difficult to monitor or follow their conduct.

Understand Your Jurors’ Online Reality

Dr. Ken Broda-Bahn has written an excellent review of a recent article I wrote (Social Media, the Internet, and Trial by Jury) about the current state of research on jurors and the Internet.  In his review, Dr. Broda-Bahn notes the challenges of determining the pervasiveness of online juror misconduct stating that estimates "need to be taken with a grain of salt because the same social desirability bias that limits the reliability of answers in voir dire also limits ability to collect data on this question of whether jurors are violating the rules."  To read his review in entirety go here.

Diluting Prejudice

Judge David John Harvey

 

Abstract

This paper is about the steps that may be taken to dilute but not totally eliminate the prejudicial effect of on-line material that relates to a defendant about to stand trial. It is posited upon the fact that jurors, despite strong judicial directions, will go on-line to seek out information relevant to the case that they are trying. The solution lies in the use of what could be described as “take-down” orders whereby material is removed from websites during the course of the trial to eliminate or dilute any prejudice that may otherwise arise, along with de-indexing the reference in search engines. The remedy of a “take-down” order restores the qualities of practical and partial obscurity of prejudicial information that was a characteristic of the pre-Digital Paradigm. The paper also discusses the issue of juror contempt in light of proposed changes to the law in the Administration of Justice (Reform of Contempt) Bill.