Search

The article discusses the risk for jurors of acquiring easy access to outside information via the Internet, and the benefit of the Internet for lawyer to gather information about potential jurors in the U.S. It highlights the recommendations to minimize downfall and maximize the benefits of the Internet within the jury. It mentions that the courts must conduct effective instructions and strategies to monitor the jurors of using the research tools and media sources.

The validity of what has been termed "scientific" or "systematic" jury selection (SJS) techniques is addressed using data from two actual cases; one criminal and one civil. Data from the highly publicized Joan Little trial indicated that where validity data were available for the survey approach and in-court rating of authoritarianism, these techniques measured what they purported to measure. Validation data were not available for a third technique—in-court rating of nonverbal communication. Data from the civil case indicated that the survey approach could successfully predict verdicts of mock jurors. It is concluded that while these data are suggestive of the validity of two of the techniques used in SJS, more rigorous tests are essential before conclusions can be drawn. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]