In June 2012, the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management issued federal judges a set of jury instructions that stresses the strict prohibition of case-related social media and Internet use on the part of jurors during trial and deliberation. The revamping of jury guidelines and warnings was issued in response to increasing concern on the part of court authorities that the ubiquity of social media-equipped smart phones and other electronic devices enhances the ease and temptation for jurors to correspond with others outside of the court room regarding case proceedings. The Committee felt it necessary to issue the “model jury instructions” in order to urge judges toward further emphasis of the consequences for jurors who engage in external case-related communication via social media and the like and the dangers of it for the preservation of the defendants’ sixth amendment right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury.
What is new about the instructions?
Though most judges do allude to the social media prohibition before a trial begins, the Committee advises that judges be as vocal about it as possible. The model instructions specifically note a number of social media and electronic communication channels. A portion of the “script” reads like this:
“During your deliberations, you must not communicate with or provide any information to anyone about this case. You may not use any electronic device or media, such as the telephone, a cell-phone, smart phone, iPhone, Blackberry, or computer, the Internet, any Internet service, any Internet chat room blog, or website such as Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, YouTube, or Twitter to communicate any information about this case or to conduct any research about this case until I accept your verdict.” (www.uscourts.gov)
The instructions suggest that the Judge repeat a variation of this admonishment before trial proceedings, several times during, and at the close of the case. Additionally, the model jury instructions encourage jurors to report to the judge if they observe a fellow juror violating the communication prohibition, which is shown to be the leading way judges learn about such infractions.
The novelty of the instructions lies in their specificity and continual reiteration throughout the duration of court proceedings. Whether that novelty will be enough to quell future violations remains to be seen.
Source: Virginia Lawyers Weekly