Social Networking and Cyber Research Undermining the Jury System

• Author: Karen Eltis
• Pages: 153-164

153

CHAPTER 7

Social Networking and Cyber Research

Undermining the Jury System

A. INTRODUCTION

“[I]f the jury system is to survive as the system for a fair trial . . . t he mis-

use of the Internet by jurors must stop,” cautioned the Lord Chief Justice,

Lord Judge, the most senior judge in England and Wales.1 In one instance,

a juror in Manchester — in a agrant breach of court ru les and common

sense — posted the details of a rape tr ial on her account (via her mobile

phone). She proceeded to survey her friends on the site, asking: “Did he

do it?” 2 e task of stopping jurors from tweeting or placing posts on sites

such as Facebook is daunting.

Presumably rebuking the lax ity characterizi ng most jurors’ — and

indeed, many courts’ — lenient attitude towards social net working and

other related “mishaps,” o dismissed as an inevitable trend derivative of

progress, the same judge refreshingly added:

We cannot accept that the use of the i nternet, or rather its misuse,

should be acknowledged and treated a s an ineradicable fact of l ife, or

that a Nelsonian blind eye shou ld be turned to it or the possibility that it

is happening. If it is not addressed , the misuse of the internet represents

a threat to the jury s ystem which depends, and r ightly depends, on

1 “Jurors ‘Should Be Prosecuted for Tweeting from Cour ts and Googling Defend-

ants’, Warns Top Judge” e Daily Mail (20 November 2010), online: htt p:// bi t.

ly/do S1f T [“Jurors Should Be Prose cuted”].

2 Guy Patrick, “Juror’s ‘Is He Guilty?’ Posts on Facebook”  e Sun (26 August

2010), online: ww w.thesun.co.uk/sol/ homepage/news/3111826/Woman-juror-

discussed-trial-on-Facebook.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News.