Connected in the Jury Box

There appears to be a growing problem with the interface between technology and the jury box.  In Maryland alone, we have two high profile situations that illustrate the problem.  The Daily Record has reported both of these incidents.  Both the Baltimore Sun and the ABA Journal have picked up the story.

The Court of Appeals recently threw out a first-degree felony murder conviction because a juror conducted an independent search on the internet for information to answer questions that the juror had about the case.  It was the second time this year that that Court of Appeals has ruled that outside research tainted a jury decision.

In Baltimore, we have just witnessed a media frenzy over the corruption trial of Mayor Shelia Dixon.  Jurors in the case were given the usual instruction not to discuss the case outside of the jury room.  This include a specific warning about using social media like Twitter.  After the verdict, reports circulated that jurors had been communicating with one another through Facebook outside of the courthouse.


The legal principles here are time honored.  What is new is that the rise of technology and Internet search make it so easy to communicate and access information outside (or even inside) the courtroom.  Internet search is one of the most powerful developments to come out of the Internet Age, making enormous amounts of information available and manageable with a few keystrokes and clicks of a computer.  Social media like Twitter and Facebook make communication easier and a part of our lives.  Both of these developments are becoming a fundamental part of modern life.  Technology has now made them ubiquitous by putting these tools in our hands in the form of  texting, smartphones, devices like the iPod Touch, and netbooks.  We no longer need to get to a computer at home or at work to search the web or communicate with others.