A fellow contributor to this blog interviewed a person about
his past jury service when the juror knew the foreperson and had even served on
a jury a few years earlier with the same foreperson. I was stunned how small that rural jury pool was.
Some questions about small jury pools came to mind after
hearing that story: Does it influence a
jury improperly if the jurors know each other?
Are deliberations very different if jurors know each other? Should attorneys use this or avoid it? Unfortunately, I have more questions than
answers.
During my jury service in a large Texas county, I found out
I knew of, but was not close to, a fellow juror because she taught at my old
high school. We knew the same people but
were otherwise strangers like the rest of the jurors.
A jury consultant company stated on its website that
the jury selection process in a rural area “where everyone knows everyone else”
is “very different” from populated areas, but states no reasoning for its
statements in hopes of getting jury consulting business even in rural
areas.
A rural jury pool might not mean that the prospective jurors
know one another. For example, in
Alaska, the courts and jury system are concerned about making a jury representative
of the area because the jurors are spread far apart. Selecting a representative jury often proves challenging.
The logistics of rural jury pools are unique, too. For the U.S. District Court for the
District of Alaska, rural jurors can get reimbursed for their airfare and taxi
fares needed to travel to the courthouse because the travel distance is great
and the terrain is rough.
Also, certain demographics and political ideologies can
correspond with rural areas, which is discussed more in this post. The author encourages lawyers to take the
conservatism of rural areas into account and even change trial strategy if the
town is very small. He suggests
conducting mock trials or focus groups in the unique venue, unless the town has
less than 10,000 people. Researching the
small venue seems like a good starting point for anyone with a jury trial in a
rural area.
A closely related issue is if the impartiality of the jury
is affected by jurors knowing the parties or witnesses. In a place with a small jury pool, I can
imagine it would be likely that jurors would know or know of the parties on a
case. For example, I observed a case
in Collin County, Texas, where a judge let a juror off the panel when the juror informed
the judge that he was related to a witness.
In one case
in a rural part of West Virginia, a new trial was granted because a juror was MySpace friends with the defendant and messaged
him without disclosing the connection to the parties.
There seem to be extra considerations for selecting a jury
from a rural area, including doing more research on the area and asking more
questions about how well the parties and jurors know each other.
No comments:
Post a Comment