Juror's Dilemma: Researching Law Independently?

In the United States, jurors are prohibited from conducting outside research on the case they are presiding over. This includes looking up more details about what happened in the case, investigating the case, or attempting to learn about the specific parties, witnesses, or locations involved. Jurors are also discouraged from conducting their own research on legal theory and precedent, as the judge will instruct them on the relevant laws and how to interpret them. However, jury consultants and attorneys may conduct research on prospective jurors to gain insights into their backgrounds and potential biases, which can help them select a jury that is receptive to their arguments.

Jurors are actively discouraged from researching or generating their own information sets

A trial is about ruling based on the facts introduced in court, not on "all the facts" globally. Jurors are only allowed to use facts introduced at trial and are actively discouraged from "researching" or generating their own information sets. For instance, if a juror were to research legal theory and precedent relevant to the trial, but nothing about the specific case, this would still be impermissible. The juror is supposed to interpret the law as the judge gives it to them, not as they understand it.

Jurors are prohibited from discussing the case, communicating about the case, or expressing opinions about the case with anyone, including family and fellow jurors. They are also not allowed to blog about their experience or the case, visit a location mentioned in the case, or research the case, a party, or a witness. These guidelines apply to all methods of communication or research, including reading, writing, electronic devices, and social media.

Attorneys often conduct research on prospective jurors to gain a fuller picture of them and predict their responses and behavior. This research can inform how to select a jury and help ensure that the insights gained are used to form a fair and impartial jury panel. Jury research can be qualitative, such as focus groups and mock trials, or quantitative, such as surveys. It is important to note that this research is different from a juror conducting their own research during a trial, which is generally prohibited.

Jurors must only use social media in a way that aligns with their responsibilities

Social media is a powerful tool that allows us to stay in touch with friends, family, and acquaintances. However, when serving as a juror, it is crucial to remember that your use of social media must align with your responsibilities and duties as a member of a jury.

As a juror, you are tasked with the important role of impartially evaluating the facts presented in court to reach a fair and just verdict. This means that your decision must be based solely on the evidence and arguments introduced during the trial and reviewed by the parties involved. Engaging in independent research or investigations, including through social media, can compromise the integrity of the trial process.

Jurors must refrain from discussing, communicating, or expressing opinions about the case on social media or any other platform. This includes fellow jurors, family members, or any other individuals. It is also imperative not to conduct any outside research about the case, the parties involved, or any witnesses. This restriction applies to all methods of communication and information gathering, including social media platforms.

Additionally, it is important to be cautious about the influence of social media on your decision-making process. Avoid following, friending, or connecting with individuals involved in the case on social media, as this could expose you to biased information or influence your perception of the case. Remember, your verdict must be based solely on the evidence presented in court, uninfluenced by external factors.

In conclusion, while social media can be a convenient way to stay connected, jurors must exercise caution and ensure their usage aligns with their duties. This means refraining from discussing the case, conducting outside research, or allowing social media to influence your decision-making process. By following these guidelines, jurors can uphold the integrity of the trial process and ensure a fair and impartial verdict.

Jury research helps attorneys understand how prospective jurors will react to a trial

In the United States, jury research is an important aspect of the trial process, helping attorneys understand how prospective jurors will react to a case. This research involves questioning potential jurors to assess their suitability, attitudes, and biases. It is a key step in the broader jury selection process, allowing attorneys to evaluate prospective jurors for biases, preconceived notions, or connections to the case that could impact their impartiality.

During the jury selection process, attorneys may use social media and questionnaires to gather information about potential jurors' occupations, social attitudes, and causes they identify with or object to. This helps attorneys make more informed decisions when selecting jurors and exercising their limited number of "peremptory challenges," which allow them to excuse prospective jurors without providing a reason.

Additionally, jury research can involve conducting voir dire, a legal term meaning "to speak the truth," which refers to the process of questioning prospective jurors. During voir dire, attorneys may employ various strategies, such as posing open-ended questions or hypothetical scenarios, to assess potential jurors' qualifications, attitudes, and biases. The judge often participates in this process, moderating and asking questions to determine if a prospective juror can follow instructions.

While jury research helps attorneys understand how prospective jurors might react to a trial, it is important to note that jurors are expected to make decisions based only on the evidence presented in court and the instructions provided by the judge. They are actively discouraged from conducting their own research or considering outside information during the trial.

Jurors must not communicate about the case or express opinions about it

When serving as a juror, it is crucial to understand and adhere to the guidelines that govern your conduct throughout the process. One of the fundamental principles that jurors must follow is refraining from communicating or expressing opinions about the case outside of the jury room. This restriction on communication and expression extends to various forms and channels, including conversations, writings, electronic devices, and social media platforms.

The rationale behind this guideline is to ensure the integrity and fairness of the judicial process. By refraining from discussing the case or expressing opinions about it, jurors prevent any potential outside influence from impacting their decision-making process. It is important to note that this restriction applies not only to interactions with the public but also to interactions with fellow jurors. Jurors should avoid discussing the case with anyone, including their family, friends, and other jurors, until the trial concludes and they are deliberating with the entire jury.

Additionally, this guideline also prohibits independent research or investigation into the case, the parties involved, or any locations mentioned in the proceedings. Jurors are expected to base their decisions solely on the evidence and facts presented in court. Engaging in independent research or seeking additional information about the case can compromise the fairness of the trial and lead to improper influences on the jury's verdict. It is imperative that jurors refrain from conducting online searches, visiting locations mentioned in the case, or seeking information about the case through any means.

While it may be tempting to seek clarification or additional information about the case, jurors must resist the urge to engage in any form of independent inquiry. The judge will provide instructions and interpretations of the law that are relevant to the specific case, and jurors must rely on this information without attempting to supplement it. By adhering to these guidelines, jurors play a crucial role in upholding the integrity of the judicial system and ensuring that their decisions are based solely on the evidence presented in court.

Judges instruct jurors on what the law is and how to interpret it

Judges are responsible for interpreting the rules and laws and applying them to each case. They instruct jurors on what the law is and how to interpret it, and these instructions are to be followed by the jurors. The judge will advise the jury that it is the sole judge of the facts and the credibility of witnesses. Jurors are to base their conclusions on the evidence presented in the trial and not on external research. Opening and closing arguments of lawyers are not considered evidence.

Jurors are expected to use their experience, common sense, and common knowledge, but they are not to rely on any private sources of information. They are actively discouraged from "researching" or generating their own information sets. They are to interpret the law as the judge gives it to them, not as they understand it. The judge will instruct the jury on the law of the case, for example, in criminal cases, the judge will tell the jury that a defendant is presumed innocent, and the burden of proof lies with the government.

The judge will also explain what basic facts are in dispute and what facts are not relevant to the case. At the end of the trial, the judge will give the jury detailed instructions on how to deliberate and come to a verdict. These instructions will include the specific listing of all the things that must be true to reach a guilty verdict in a criminal case or to find the defendant liable in a civil case. The final instructions will also include an explanation of the burden of proof to be used.

In some states, jury reform recommendations encourage standardized instructions, providing jurors with copies or recordings of the instructions.

Frequently asked questions