Technology has entered the jury box. While the press has long reported on pending trials, bloggers -- or so-called "citizen journalists," some sitting in juries -- have increasingly posted commentary about judicial proceedings. Yet recent events suggest that blog posts and other electronic communications by jurors about ongoing trials can potentially disrupt the integrity of the proceedings.
Indeed, several months ago, defense lawyers in a federal political corruption trial in Pennsylvania announced plans to appeal a guilty verdict based, in part, on the fact that a juror posted remarks about the trial and the jury's deliberations to Facebook and Twitter.
Similarly, a construction materials company recently appealed a $12.6 million verdict in an Arkansas case because one juror posted short messages on Twitter during the trial that allegedly exhibited bias against the company.[FOOTNOTE 1]
With the new generation of mobile devices with wireless e-mail capability, jurors may be tempted to post thoughts about the ongoing jury experience, despite explicit instructions to avoid discussing the trial with outside parties.
Given this new technological reality, counsel and judges have adapted jury instructions that include specific charges against blogging or posting online comments about a pending trial. Trial attorneys also have started to routinely monitor pretrial and post-trial publicity on the Internet to determine whether jurors or others had blogged or posted online comments about the trial that might reveal pretrial bias. Beyond jurors, counsel and judges need to be aware how their own blogging practices are impacted by professional ethical standards.
To Continue Reading: Click Here----------------------------------------------
Source: law.com
By: Richard Raysman and Peter Brown
0 comments:
Post a Comment