Juror Tweets Could Create Mistrial

nandemoari writes "Russell Wright and his construction company, Stoam Holdings, recently lost a $12 million dollar lawsuit brought by investors. But lawyers for the firm have complained that juror Johnathan Powell's Twitter comments broke rules when discussing the civil case with the public. The arguments in this dispute center on two points. Powell insists (and the evidence appears to back him up) that he did not make any pertinent updates until after the verdict was given; if that's the case, the objection would presumably be thrown out. If Powell did post updates during the trial, the judge must decide whether he was actively discussing the case. Powell says he only posted messages and did not read any replies. Intriguingly, the lawyers for Stoam Holding are not arguing so much that other people directly influenced Powell's judgment, rather that he might have felt a need to agree to a spectacular verdict to impress the people reading his posts."

Comments

It's the Juror's Fault

[rm999]

He made tweets like:

"So, Johnathan, what did you do today?' Oh, nothing really. I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else's money!"
and
"Oh, and nobody buy Stoam. It's bad mojo, and they'll probably cease to exist, now that their wallet is $12M lighter. http://www.stoam.com/."

He was clearly show-boating for his tweeter fans, even if in jest. Therefore, I do think there is a chance that he "felt a need to agree to a spectacular verdict to impress the people reading his posts."

While it is sucks that there may have to be a retrial, the important of impartial justice supersedes the inconvenience.

Re:It's the Juror's Fault

[SpottedKuh]

While it is sucks that there may have to be a retrial, the important of impartial justice supersedes the inconvenience.

If only I had mod points. The potential issue is that a juror may have been showboating (i.e., not being impartial). The fact that it was done using Twitter is irrelevant. It's really no different than if he went home and said these things to everyone in person...except that the lawyers probably wouldn't have known about it then.

Re:It's the Juror's Fault

[Narpak]

I guess it is high time proper behaviour in the digital landscape become a serious, and mandatory, course at all elementary and high schools. And perhaps send someone around to politicians, judges, teachers, and generally everyone above the age of twenty who do not know not to post stupid shit online.

"So, Johnathan, what did you do today?' Oh, nothing really. I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else's money!" and "Oh, and nobody buy Stoam. It's bad mojo, and they'll probably cease to exist, now that their wallet is $12M lighter. http://www.stoam.com/ [stoam.com]."

Those comments pretty much makes it look like this guy should never have been a juror in the first place.

Re:It's the Juror's Fault

[Beardo the Bearded]

Are those really his posts? If so, then there's clearly grounds for a mistrial.

Disclaimer: My legal training is from /. plus Law and Order.

Re:Tweet?

[Roane]

I prefer using the preexisting terminology for Twitter users, "twit".

Re:It's like notetaking?

[rm999]

The lawyers of the defendant are claiming that he was showboating his power, something that's impossible to do with a pad of paper.

Re:Tweet?

[garcia]

I could recreate the entire site's functionality in 15 minutes.

The functionality isn't what's important, it's the community that is. Plenty of people have done MySpace and Facebook prior to both of them being around (webrings, GeoCities, etc are all related to those two sites) but the biggest draw is the number of users who have latched to make it successful.

That said, if you come up with a website that has the same (or preferably better) functionality and better network scalability and uptime as well as attract a customer base that rivals Twitter, then by all means go for it. In fact, if it's good enough I'm sure people will eventually make the switch and make you rich.

Let me know what retarded word you come up with to describe your service's micro-blog posts so that we can make fun of it here and get modded appropriately too.

Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Powell says he only posted messages and did not read any replies.

Sounds like your average day on slashdot.

Re:Tweet?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've made many websites, far more complex than that pile of trash. Feel free to look at the one in my sig. -- Free Canadian Online Dating [dreamsingles.ca]

You should've called it twatter.

Re:Spectacular

[slashqwerty]

rather that he might have felt a need to agree to a spectacular verdict

A verdict so spectacular that 11 other people came to the same conclusion without using twitter?

The defendant is entitled to a unanimous verdict from twelve impartial jurors, not eleven. Even if you let that requirement slide there is still the possibility that the twelfth juror unduly influenced his colleagues so he would be able to publish some spectacular posts.

Re:Tweet?

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

I've made many websites, far more complex than that pile of trash. Feel free to look at the one in my sig.

And they scale effectively up to millions of users while maintaining 98.7% uptime or better?

I agree twitter is baffling in its popularity, and probably overvalued - but in my own experience when someone says "I can code X in 20 minutes" it usually indicates a serious lack of understanding of the requirements ;) *

* "Hello World" excepted from this.

Re:It's like notetaking?

[techno-vampire]

I think there are regulations for when / if you are allowed to journal / take notes.

There are. You're given a notebook (and extras, if you need them) to take all the notes you want/need. Every juror sits in the same seat, every day, and those notebooks never leave the courtroom until the jury goes to deliberate, at which time the jury takes their notes with them. Those are the only notes you're supposed to take.

IANAL, but I have been a juror.