St. Thomas Law Review
First Page
473
Document Type
Article
Abstract
In the context of the judicial system, it is the judges, lawyers, and parties to lawsuits who are equally affected by juror's statements. While this problem is not exclusive to criminal law, it is within the context of criminal law that the most severe problems are presented to the courts. This is not an attempt to suggest any lack of seriousness associated with a civil claim, but the fact that the stakes for a defendant remain higher in a criminal case because an individual's fundamental, constitutional rights are at issue is a significant difference. The knee jerk reaction by the courts and State Bar Associations has been to include a standard jury instruction admonishing jurors from using the Internet to either conduct any research or use social media to comment about the trial. However, the alarming number of cases involving Internet Misconduct that arise from the use of social media or Internet search engines demonstrates that all too often, jurors succumb to the temptation of constant connectivity. This growing trend highlights a breakdown between the mindset of jurors and the judicial system. "It seems . . . that many jurors do not see blogging, Tweeting or posting as communication, or at least they don't consider it to fall within the rubric of traditional admonitions.
Recommended Citation
Patrick M. Delaney,
Sorry Linus, I Need Your Security Blanket: How the Smartphone, Constant Connectivity with the Internet, and Social Networks Act as Catalysts for Juror Misconduct,
24
St. Thomas L. Rev.
473
(2012).
Available at:
https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol24/iss3/4