Question

Read the following set of facts and answer the questions posed: Referred to as the “Google Mistrial,” a federal judge in Florida declared a mistrial after a juror told that judge that he had been doing research on the Internet on the drug trial in which he was serving. When the judge declared the mistrial, eight other jurors confessed that they had been doing the same thing. Judges have long warned jurors about using outside sources, including the Internet, but BlackBerries and iPhones have proven to be mighty tempting for jurors. Some jurors are using Facebook to announce when verdicts are coming. One juror even looked up evidence that had been excluded by the judge in the case. When asked why he violated the judge’s order, the juror said simply, “Well, I was curious.” Another juror contacted the defendant through Facebook, and another mistrial resulted. A judge in Arkansas is reviewing a request for a reversal of a $12.6 million jury verdict against a company from one of the company’s lawyers based on the court’s discovery that one of the jurors was using. Twitter to send out postings about how the trial was proceeding. An excerpt from the posting follows: “Oh, and nobody buy Stoam. It’s bad mojo and they’ll probably cease to Exist now that their wallet is $12m lighter … So, Jonathan, what did you do today? Oh nothing really, I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else’s money.” What is the problem with jurors using these electronic tools during their cases? When answering the post, it would be helpful to define what is a jury and what is the purpose of a jury in a court proceeding.

Answer 1

The Problems behind the utilization of electronic instruments during cases are as per the following-

1. There is no issue behind the utilization of electronic devices by a member of the jury. The genuine issue emerges when the members of the jury are utilizing Twitter, facebook or other electronic instruments during the preliminary. On the off chance that an individual sitting in the court utilizes Twitter to post anything about the case, it is right. In any case, when the Juror himself composes something about the case on his divider on facebook, it isn't only a status, however the mystery that must be kept between different members of the jury till the case is shut.

2. As indicated by Law, the hearers shouldn't discover data about a case from some other source or outside source. The data that they will use to take any choice the case is given in the court by the two legal advisors and the accompanying proof that they set up. The purpose for this law is that there are no one-sided members of the jury in the court. The decision that the adjudicator and the members of the jury will choose would be absolutely founded on the preliminary that was led in the court.

3. The legal hearers need to take choices with shared assent among their kindred attendants. This choice is occurred in a room where nobody else is permitted. The decision is then put in an envelope and send to the adjudicator and afterward the appointed authority conveys his decision. This is the methodology for a legitimate case. On the off chance that the legal hearer goes on twitter or facebook and reports that what will be the decision under the steady gaze of even adjudicators declare, at that point this will be against the member of the jury's rules.

4. The legitimate arrangement of US unmistakably expresses that each law preliminary ought to be reasonable. The utilization of electronic instruments risks the decency of the law and it ought to be prohibited to utilize any such apparatuses in the court. For instance, the respondent's facebook page shows clear understanding that he is blameworthy of the squeezed charges, however then we won't need any court to take reasonable choices. The decency of the court is lost by the web based life.

5. The utilisation of internet based life by the jury can likewise prompt strain all through the nation. There may be a case that could hurt the notions of the individuals in a community.If the attendant would announce the decision heretofore on his blog or twitter, at that point it would be difficult for the legislature to control the individuals with passionate qualities behind that case. It is ideal to not let members of the jury utilize any electronic media during jury obligation or they ought not utilize online life to present things relating on that case.

Hence, the members of the jury need to quit utilizing internet based life for pondering the privileged insights of the preliminary room. They can utilize their mobile phones, workstations, and other electronic apparatuses for their own utilization as it were. On the off chance that the decision must be reasonable the members of the jury must be unadulterated and unprejudiced in their dynamic. This is the issue behind the utilization of electronic apparatuses by the legal hearers.

PLEASE LIKE MY ANSWER