Court Orders Juror to Reveal Facebook Posts Made During Criminal Trial

Greg Bernhardt

I found a very interesting case in my daily Westlaw feed the other day that raised some important points about the line between privacy and the right to a fair trial. The opinion by the California Court of Appeals,*Juror Number … Continue reading →

Read More...

Number Nine

I'm inclined to agree with the court in this case. It seems to me that the juror was contractually prohibited from leaking details about the case; since the court has ample evidence that he did, in fact, discuss the case with outsiders and other jurors, it seems reasonable that they would demand to see the posts themselves. It's only right that the case be retried if the jurors ended up acting inappropriately.

zoobyshoe

An interesting, sticky problem. The internet has certainly complicated things.

AlephZero

This is quite clear in UK law as being "contempt of court" whcih is a serious offence. A recent example which resulted in a prison sentence for the juror:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...herts-16676871

As I understand it (and from practical experience having done a couple of sessions of jury service), when you swear your oath to serve on a jury in the UK, that effectively overrules any other legal considerations - you have agreed to do (or not do) whatever the court tells you, until you are discharged.

Pyrrhus

I have been discussing this problem for a while now. There is a need to redefine laws given the prolific availability of user generated content. It is now easy for anyone to make a webpage, upload photos, upload videos, write articles... and share them.