Jury trials are infamous for invoking inter alia annoyance, irritation, and pure boredom from those that are charged with observing, evaluating, and deciding the result of the trial. Jurors are human and like most of us, forcing oneself to remain attentive throughout an entire trial can be problematic.
The Cause
In general, the average attention span of an adult is around eight to twelve seconds. Take a moment, read that again, and let it sink it! As current students, we are acutely aware of how much discipline it takes to remain focused to class discussion. As future attorneys, knowing this attention-span issue exists makes us better-equipped to serve our clients – so long as we act on it.
An average jury trial in Ohio lasts approximately two to three days while complex jury trials can last for several weeks. Setting aside other collateral consequences of serving on a jury, such as loss of income, child care, transportation, etc., two to three days of sitting through a jury trial is a severe inconvenience for most.
A Solution
With the massive increase in the use of electronic devices, the legal field has no choice but to adapt in order to combat jurors’ lack of attention. Failure to do so exacerbates the problem. Convincing courts and established members of the legal community to adapt to the technological changes has its difficulties. First and foremost, technology is not cheap. Second, it takes time to install the technology. Finally, not everyone is fully capable of operating the technology.
Despite these difficulties, which for some could be considered excuses, the legal community needs to take action. Courts have implemented various rules pertaining to practice and procedure (e.g. FRCP) and required compliance. Requiring practitioners to use technology during trial should not be a shock. There are many continuing legal education presentations that can provide the necessary education for practitioners that need a refresher.
I want you to imagine sitting in the juror box after you have been empaneled and sworn in. The judge’s staff comes by and gives you and your fellow jurors a tablet. This tablet is locked down, similar to Examplify’s lockdown feature. The judge gives you a short statement about the purpose and use of the tablet during trial. As the trial begins, jurors can view a timeline that shows the current phase the trial is in. The interface is engaging and user-friendly. As exhibits are introduced into evidence (the evidence has previously been downloaded and only becomes viewable once the judge rules on the admission or uploaded simultaneously), jurors can look at the exhibits up close. When the judge gives instructions, those instructions can be made viewable. Jurors can mark-up the exhibits or make annotations. Ultimately, when it is time to deliberate, the jurors use the tablets to review evidence, review jury instructions, as well as review any other information that was made available to them during trial.
Conclusion
Knowing that adults have short attention spans, practitioners should be proactive in taking steps to help curtail this problem within the context of the legal system. There are practical solutions that can be utilized and implemented that can reduce jurors’ lack of attention. It just takes initiative and a willingness for change. The solution discussed above is just one idea of many and the legal field should strive to provide jurors with a less than desirable jury trial experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment