Google and the court room

With the invention of the Internet andhand held access through cell phones and PDAs, jurors are taking itupon themselves to investigate court cases on their own. Jurors areunder strict instruction to solely consider evidence presented in thecourtroom. Circuit Judge John C. Themelis of Baltimore, Marylandrecounts that a fellow judge declared a mistrial in a case where ajuror used the Internet to research a defendant's criminal record. Local attorneys have heard stories that jurors have Googled their firm information through iPhones and other hand held devices.

When selected for a jury of any civilor criminal jury trial, the judge reads a set of instructions andclearly states, 'Do not research or investigate the case on yourown. You must base your decision only on the evidence presented inthis courtroom.' The burden of decision upon a juror is a heavyone. It seems only natural for them to want a complete picture ofthe case including background on the plaintiff, defendant, andattorneys. Google is a common search engine that allows the publicto type in a person's name and access pages of public criminalrecords and a person's background information.

A recent poll by a trial consultantfound that a huge majority of jurors follow the rulescompletely. However, is human curiosity too strong when access isright at their finger tips? Courts are beginning to seriouslyconsider the implications of personal research in the jury system. It's possible that court decisions may be overturned because of jurymisconduct. So, is the Internet compromising the jury system? For more information please contact our law firm.