Massachusetts High Court Approves Excusal of Jurors for Inability to Understand Legal Principles
In Commonwealth v. Fisher, the Supreme Judicial Court approved the trial judge’s sustaining of the prosecution’s motion to strike two Haitian American jurors for cause due to fears they did not adequately understand pertinent legal concepts. After ample voir dire questioning of both citizens, the judge was concerned about language difficulties of one venire member and about the comprehension capacity of the other. His reasoning followed this path:
It is important to me to make sure that we have a fair and impartial jury. It is important to me that, if we can, ... we have some representation on the jury of people that have backgrounds and who look like the defendants. I think that's important. But it is important to me that we have jurors who can understand and who demonstrate an ability to do this. This is an extremely serious matter, and I have a concern about her ability to understand. And we may not know whether she understands a concept. The concepts that she was asked about, she did not demonstrate a real understanding of. So, while I'm torn, I'm going to excuse her.
U. of Michigan Law Prof Defends Civil Jury Trials & Sees Value for Public Discourse
Professor Len Niehoff’s views on the 7th Amendment’s creation of civil jury trial rights is featured in The Detroit News. He starts by asking, “Very few nations have legal systems that require civil jury trials. The Seventh Amendment therefore raises an intriguing question: Why did the Founders think this right was important?” Here is one of his answers:
We forbid evidence that we think is unreliable, like most hearsay. We want jurors to hear testimony from live witnesses who can be cross-examined. We don’t want jurors relying on rumors and gossip. Our faith in the decisions that juries make depends heavily on these efforts to focus them on the evidence that matters and that is adequately trustworthy. The right to a jury trial therefore holds a broader lesson for all of us. Imagine how our discussions of public issues would improve if we held ourselves to the same standard, basing our opinions on evidence instead of memes, bumper stickers, conspiracy theories and the latest disinformation that pops up on our screens. Paying attention to the evidence. What a concept.
Is an Opinionated Jury Something to be Feared in a Trump Trial?
Slate journalist Shirin Ali provides responses to this question from a variety of trial experts from the legal academy and the trial bar. Kevin O’Brien, partner at the Ford O’Brien Landy law firm and a former assistant U.S. attorney, thinks concerns about opinionated jurors are overblown. He says, “You just can’t say we can’t have a trial because people have strong opinions about Trump. “There has to be a way to reach a level of jury knowledge and objectivity that is satisfactory to the task at hand. If you can’t, then there’s something wrong with the very institution. And I don’t think there is.”
A Q-4-U About E-Questionnaires
The NCSC wants to learn more about how courts have implemented remote case-specific voir dire questionnaires in jury trials. If you or your court is using electronic case-specific questionnaires (or even if you are just experimenting) and are willing to participate in a remote workshop to share tips and learn from each other, please email Laney Snyder with your name; contact information; title (e.g., judge, jury manager, court administrator); and the name and location (state and county) of your court. We will schedule a remote meeting in mid-October to begin discussions.
Judge Orders Protections for Jurors in Georgia Prosecution of Mr. Trump & Others
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ordered that, once the cases involving the former president and 18 codefendants reach trial, defendants, reporters, and observers will be prohibited from recording, photographing, or identifying jurors in any way that might reveal who they are, where they live, or other personal details about them. McAfee ordered that lawyers only refer to jurors by their number in court filings or in their remarks in open court. A coalition of media outlets that includes the Atlanta Journal-Constitution objected to the request on grounds that the courts in Georgia have traditionally been open to press coverage, including reporting on the composition of juries. The only exception McAfee allowed in his order is the announcement of a verdict by the jury foreperson, the audio of which may be recorded.