High Profile or High Pressure Cases?

Do Jurors Treat High Profile Cases Differently Than Ordinary Cases? 

        I think it is safe to say that, in most cases, the answer is "yes." But what changes? In my perspective, there are two main elements that change during a high-profile trial: pressure on the jurors and media coverage. 

PRESSURE

        In high profile cases, jurors feel pressure for many reasons. Jurors face both internal and external pressures when deciding even a simple case, let alone one involving a celebrity or well-known figure. 

        Internally, jurors fight with their own thoughts, beliefs, experiences, and opinions when reviewing the facts to determine the defendant's guilt. For some, the internal battle is the hardest, to ensure they are making the right decision not only for the defendant and victim(s), but for their own peace of mind. Consider the following quote by a juror who served on a capital murder case: 

"Afterwards, I told people I was on a jury trial, and my white friends congratulated me on getting a conviction. 'I hope the guy fries -- he deserves it if goes out and commits murder' was one comment. 

This all made me very angry. We were not out for vengeance. We saw a sad situation that got out of control, and no good outcomes. I realized that there is an entire population of people that we live with and among, and we have entirely different viewpoints about the criminal justice system. I saw that there is tremendous pain there, and no solutions."

        Another aspect of internal pressure stems from the court. The object of the court system is to declare justice, which is why there are many rules concerning the procedure, evidence, jury instructions, etc. Jurors inherently feel pressure by the court to follow the rules, consider the (admissible) evidence, and make the best decision based on the evidence and facts presented. In trying to achieve the court's objective, jurors feel more pressure to return the most reasonable verdict. It is easy to understand why the pressure from the court would be greater in cases with high profile parties - more reason to pay attention, follow the rules, and analyze the evidence presented. 

MEDIA

        Another aspect that tends to influence jury members is the media. A rather obvious statement is that media tends to be greater when a party or victim is well-known to the public. When a defendant or victim is high profile, media coverage never ceases. There are numerous studies about how media impacts juries and the fairness of trials, but it is also fair to conclude that media impacts the way jurors approach the case altogether - with both internal and external elements as well. 

        An internal aspect of the media could be as simple as a juror thinking "what would the public say about this?" looming with every witness testimony, piece of evidence, and objection within the trial. 

        Externally, the jury could be concerned about what the public is seeing outside of the courtroom. Many jurors could think "what evidence and information is the public seeing on TV that we are not allowed to factor into our decision?" 

        Media has the ability to completely influence and change the way a juror approaches, thinks about, and analyzes a case. If any media is involved (or even the thought of media is contemplated in the juror's mind), the fairness of a trial becomes unclear.  

Although some elements can fit easily into the internal or external categories, there are many that strike a balance between both. In cases where a party of victim are famous in some way or high-profile, it is nearly impossible to ensure that these pressures do not consume the jury, especially with media and technology growing larger and more efficient by the day. But understanding how these elements affect a juror's mindset before, during, and after the trial are pivotal in assessing how effective our justice system is.