Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Courts Move To Ban Juror Use of Net, Social Sites

Posted by kdawson on from the tell-no-one dept.

coondoggie passes along a NetworkWorld report on the pronouncement of a judicial conference committee recommending that trial judges specifically instruct jurors not to use any electronic communications devices or sites during trial and deliberations. Here's the committee report (PDF). "If you think you're going to use your spanking new iPhone to entertain yourself next time you're on jury duty, think again. Judges are going to take an even dimmer view of jury member use of Blackberry, iPhone, or other electronic devices as a judicial policy-setting group has told district judges they should restrict jurors from using electronic technologies to research or communicate. ... The instructions state jurors must not use cell phones, e-mail, Blackberry, iPhone, text messaging, or on Twitter, or communicate through any blog or website, through any internet chat room, or by way of any other social networking websites, including Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, and YouTube."

7 of 288 comments (clear)

  1. No different than any other sequestering by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is this different than any other method of sequestering a jury? It makes perfect sense to me, human nature being what it is.

    1. Re:No different than any other sequestering by coaxial · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I guess courts treat jurors like children.

      Only if as a juror you behave as a child, and can't respect the rules of evidence.

      These rules have been around for centuries. As a juror, your information about the case you're hearing is to come through testimony given in court. This allows for a fair trail, since both sides can attempt to refute the evidence and testimony. If you go around playing amateur Columbo and CSI, you're going screw up someone's life. You are not an expert. You don't know what you're doing. You're engaging in the CSI effect.

      Don't. Just don't. If you do, I'd want you thrown off my jury.

      And forget bringing your laptop or iPad into the court room to take notes about what's going on in court, so you can make an accurate decision when it comes time for deliberation.

      Exactly. That's why they give you *gasp* a pen and paper!

    2. Re:No different than any other sequestering by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly. That's why they give you *gasp* a pen and paper!

      and how the hell am I supposed to type with a pen and paper?

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
  2. Re:Good luck ever seating a jury again! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just wear a T-Shirt that says "Jury" on the front and "Nullification" on the back.

  3. Re:Good luck ever seating a jury again! by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, I'm certainly not going to agree to being sentenced to weeks of solitary confinement without having myself been accused of a crime. Even prisoners get to receive visitors and make phone calls.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  4. Re:WTF? by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >but denying the use of dictionaries makes no sense at all.

    It does make sense. That's because most dictionaries do not give the legal definition for a term, and the legal definition can vary from state to state. If you are unsure, and you are on a jury, you have the foreman ask the judge the meaning of a word.

    For instance, there is the colloquial definition of the word "insanity" yet in the United States there are 51 legal definitions (50 states plus federal) of that term.

    I am sure NYCL and other actual lawyers here that can chime in on this topic.

    Looking shit up in a dictionary can be a very bad thing.

    --
    BMO

  5. Terrible editing on this non-story by Narcogen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The summary here contains a pullquote that has been specifically edited in a misleading way to turn what is basically a non-story into a story.

    The summary says:

    Judges are going to take an even dimmer view of jury member use of Blackberry, iPhone, or other electronic devices as a judicial policy-setting group has told district judges they should restrict jurors from using electronic technologies to research or communicate. ... The instructions state jurors must not use cell phones, e-mail, Blackberry, iPhone, text messaging, or on Twitter, or communicate through any blog or website, through any internet chat room, or by way of any other social networking websites, including Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, and YouTube."

    Pay close attention to the ellipses after "communicate".

    This quote appears to be from the committee report, but the committee report link is broken; it contains no href, just anchor tags.

    The article says:

    "the suggested instructions specifically inform jurors that they are prohibited from using these technologies in the courtroom, in deliberations, or outside the courthouse to communicate about or research cases on which they currently serve"

    Not convinced yet? Here is the complete first paragraph from the committee report mentioned, but NOT linked to, in the quote contained in the summary:

    "At its December 2009 meeting, the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management (CACM) endorsed a set of suggested jury instructions that district judges should consider using to help deter jurors from using electronic technologies to research or communicate about cases on which they serve. The suggested instructions are included as Attachment 1."

    Emphasis is mine in previous two quotations. In other words, you are not banned from using these devices or services. The article mentions that you may not use these things to discuss or research the case. The networkworld article uses the inflammatory word "ban" in its headline (inappropriately) and the Slashdot post goes even further, deliberately eliminating context crucial to understanding the actual guidelines and replacing them with ellipses.