JURORS are asking Facebook friends and Twitter followers to help decide the fates of criminals with no regard for the consequences, a report has found.
The Centre for Law, Governance and Public Policy, at Bond University, says existing punishments for rogue jurors - including criminal prosecution - fail to address the problems created by social media.
It warns trials around the world are being corrupted, delayed or aborted by jurors who:
CONDUCT polls of their Facebook friends as to whether a defendant is guilty.
MAKE comments about court staff through social media, such as "f**k the judge".
RESEARCH the case they are hearing through Google.
EXCHANGING Facebook messages with the accused person.
The centre's report, released today, echoes concerns expressed by Supreme Court Justice David Peek last month.
He warned witnesses were researching criminal cases before giving evidence in court, leading to tainted outcomes.
In its report, the centre says social media misuse by jurors is the "single most significant challenge" faced by the world's courts.
It says that, in the US alone, 90 cases were challenged or overturned because of juror misconduct in 1999-2010 and a further 21 in 2009-10.
In the UK, there have been 18 appeals arising from juror actions since 2005.
"Joanne Fraill was sentenced to eight months prison for contempt of court by the (UK) High Court in 2011 for exchanging Facebook messages with the accused in a drug trial while she was serving on the jury," it says.
"Another UK juror was dismissed from a child abduction and sexual assault trial after she asked her Facebook friends to help her decide on the verdict.
"(She wrote) 'I don't know which way to go, so I'm holding a poll'."
The report says judges and prosecutors have struggled to make jurors understand the problems they are causing.
It says that, in 2009, a US judge admonished five jurors for their online conduct, including one person who had posted "f**k the judge" on Facebook.
"The judge asked the young male juror about the offensive comment and was told: 'Hey judge, that's just Facebook stuff'," it says.
The centre says jurors pay little attention to the penalties for misconduct and are therefore not swayed by them.
"It has also been argued that imposing punishment is contrary to the notion that jury duty is a civic responsibility and jurors should be supported and encouraged to do it to the best of their ability," it says.
The centre recommends judges provide written directions to jurors before the start of a trial.
Those directions should clearly and unambiguously tell them not to use social media, and refrain from using electronic devices during the trial.
They should also spell out the consequences for defendants, prosecutors and courts if jurors do go rogue, such as increased cost to the community and incorrect verdicts.
The centre further recommends potential jurors undergo a "brief pre-trial training module" to better understand their duties and responsibilities.
"The model would also include a self-test of jurors' understanding... by seeking their response to 'rogue juror' scenarios," it says.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
Guilty or not? Jurors ask Facebook
Dengan url
http://ichancibby.blogspot.com/2013/04/guilty-or-not-jurors-ask-facebook.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
Guilty or not? Jurors ask Facebook
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
Guilty or not? Jurors ask Facebook
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar