The Difficulties of Jury Impartiality in the Digital Age

https://ca.pinterest.com/pin/282460207874725818/

In a world where internet use is a prominent part of everyday life, how can we block out the influence of unlimited information and opinions? This question is especially important in times when neutrality is necessary and becomes critical when thinking about jury impartiality. Juries are a randomly selected group of people over the age of 18 chosen to make decisions about who is guilty in a trial. If selected, it is an individual's civic duty to serve on a jury and help come to a final verdict on a particular case. 

Given that jurors make high-impact decisions, it is crucial for them to remain unbiased and impartial throughout the entire trial process. All members of the jury are to remain uninfluenced by any preconceptions and must make their decision based only on information discussed in the courtroom, at trial. To ensure their impartiality and protect the right to a fair trial, selected jurors are to be separated from outside information regarding the case. They are prohibited from conducting any outside research and must reach a final verdict based solely on the information presented in court. This means jurors must not watch news related to the case, consume information on social media regarding the case, or discuss the case with anyone. Jurors must regulate their internet use and online interactions to align with the responsibilities they have as jury members. These rules are set to protect those at trial and ensure they are able to exercise their right to a fair trial. 

Maintaining an impartial standpoint as a juror becomes increasingly difficult in the digital world we live in, where the internet is a part of daily life. Social media and easy internet access allow us to consume an abundance of information on any topic, at any time. The perpetual consumption of information becomes problematic when trying to maintain a completely unbiased view. The bias that outside information can introduce to jurors is sometimes obvious but can also be difficult to eliminate. 

In high profile cases, the impact that the internet has on jury bias is specifically evident. Online narratives have the power to shape juror’s pre-conceptions on particular crimes and cases. These preconceptions then risk being brought into the courtroom with jurors. Rumors, misinformation and public opinions of high profile cases spread at much higher volumes because of the internet. Many of the times much of the information spreading across different platforms is not based in fact. They are usually just opinions, rumors or lies. Social media allows individuals to share their opinions about a case, regardless of what truth lies behind them. In instances of popular, high profile cases, it can be hard to use the internet without being exposed to information that would create bias because of the high volumes of online discussion. In a world where social media and the internet is so embedded in day to day life, it can be especially difficult for jury members to escape the outside influence on their opinions and maintain a neutral standpoint in court.

The influence may not always be as immediately obvious in low profile cases. This is because there is less widespread online discussion of the particular case as well as less specific information made public via news sources. While it may be easier in low profile cases for jury members to avoid public discussion regarding their specific case, the effect of the internet on jury bias is still an exceedingly prominent issue. Social media and the internet offer unlimited access to knowledge, information, and opinions. This can affect the biases that jurors hold in a more general sense. Preconceptions about certain types of people or crimes can be shaped by general information absorbed on the internet. For example, the internet can perpetuate specific ideas about murder cases and what makes someone guilty when put on trial. A juror may then subconsciously bring these preconceptions into the courtroom with them. This is worrisome because preconceptions have the power to affect the final verdict of jurors and interfere with the right to a fair trial. In cases like these, the effect of the internet on jurors is present and impactful but also hard to detect and eliminate. 

In a world where we are constantly subject to endless information and opinions, making a completely impartial decision can be greatly challenging. Understanding jury impartiality in today's context is important to promoting the future of the right to a fair trial. Understanding this can also help in grappling with the difficult issue of how to go about reducing subconscious juror bias influenced by the internet. Because the internet is constantly evolving, so is the issue of understanding the effects it has. There is no clear cut method to ensuring complete jury impartiality in all cases which is why awareness and understanding of this issue is hugely important.