Overhauling the jury system

[Bob Hubbard]

The jury can only deliberate on the evidence and testimony the court allows to be used. This has the biggest impact on the out come of the trial. Any trial can be presented with important items being barred from the jury for many reasons. This is why good judges are important, as is good police work.


Here in California jurors are not anonymous. You don't get your name printed in the paper, but anyone around during jury selection or the trial can find out who the jurors are with very little effort.

Yes, but be it California or tin buck too, if professional jurors were, by declaration, prohibited from public and especially media interrogation at any time concerning their profession and decisions, finding out who is a juror would be extremely difficult.
This has been one of the main problems in the system today.
News people clamour to talk to jury members after a decision.
This only adds to the chaos.
The media has too many times been guilty of trying a case on the airways, long before the actual trial gets underway.
Jurors are ouestioned 5 minutes after a decision has been rendered.
Today's jurors are for the most part good people but in the case where they are involved in a "high profile" trial, the coin has two sides.
Most are publicity seakers and in the case of the up comming Jackson trial, down right impervious to the law and what would be expected of them as a juror.
The people showing up to be on that jury are there for one reason only.
They either want him convicted or aquitted, depending if they like him or not.
This equasion would never enter into it with a professional jury because that jury would not be aware just who would be sitting in on that trial until just before trial time.

 

[CaptainZilog]

Even with all that the people most interested in influencing the jury are those present in the courtroom. So unless the jurors are kept unseen and are not allowed to go home, where they may be followed, I can see many ways a motivated person(s) could find out who they were. How paranoid should one get?

The baliffs make sure the jurors are not tampered with. If a jury needs to be sequestered, the lawyers cannot talk to them. If it happens, it's a mistrial and the lawyer would most likely end up debarred. If anyone else attempts it, I'm sure they would be charged with contempt and spend a while in the clink.

 

[mach8]

The people showing up to be on that jury are there for one reason only.
They either want him convicted or aquitted, depending if they like him or not.
This equasion would never enter into it with a professional jury because that jury would not be aware just who would be sitting in on that trial until just before trial time.

Every time I've shown up for jury service you have no idea where you'll end up. You get assigned to a judge and once a jury has been seated for the case being tried you go back to the juror pool to be assigned to another court if needed.

It's very hard to get on a jury if you have not been called up, I would imagine. So I doubt if people show up to try to get on a jury for a high profile case.

So what if the media talk to jurors after the trial is over. It's over with. They talk to the lawyers, defendants, plaintiffs, and anyone else they think will sell a story. That doesn't mean anyone has to talk to them. It's much better than shady goings on behind closed doors where no body has a clue what transpired, some kind of star chamber lynching.

 

[mach8]

The baliffs make sure the jurors are not tampered with. If a jury needs to be sequestered, the lawyers cannot talk to them. If it happens, it's a mistrial and the lawyer would most likely end up debarred. If anyone else attempts it, I'm sure they would be charged with contempt and spend a while in the clink.

The baliffs are supposed to make sure the jurors are not tampered with, and prison guards are supposed to follow rules and regulations. But prisoners still get drugs, abused by guards, etc.

Any system that relies upon humans is inherently unreliable. Carve that in stone.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

"On a similar note, this system would give one small set of people a LARGE responsibility, basically power over everyone else, and I honestly don't think human beings are capable of handling it."

Thes people paid to be professional jurors would be no different than any other professional.
Lawyers, Doctors, judges, Lawmakers and even Presidents "wield" a lot of power over other people.
A surgeon with scalpal in hand "wields" a tremendous amount of power over life and death.
A well versed and well schooled attorney "wields" tremendous power over a person's freedom or incarseration, wealth or poverty.
Lawmakers "wield" tremendous power over how society shall be governed.
Presidents "wield" tremendous power over who will, and who won't be, engaged in war.
Professional people are just that, professional.
Just because they are professionals that happen to go to work in this country's court rooms, does not make them a "linch mob" or any one more or less prone to corription.
Their decisions as professionals would be on the same plain as any other professional.