Defense attorneys, prosecutors, and judges alike have found it difficult unplugging jurors from the ubiquitous internet. In September 2010, a juror was sanctioned for posting a guilty verdict on his Facebook wall days before deliberations were concluded. More often than not, people are more comfortable expressing their opinions online than they are in person, as the internet not only provides a wealth of information, but also a cloak of anonymity. Now courts are trying to use social media to their advantage by introducing Facebook profiles in the jury selection process.
Facebook profile pages allow for a certain inhibition – photos of friends (flattering or not), commentaries, “likes” and wall postings – which are invaluable tools to provide greater insight into a person’s biases and prejudices, as well as giving an outsider an overall sense of their character and who they really are. This is exactly what trial attorneys seek to uncover when choosing a jury. It often does not come through in the screening process because many individuals are too shy, intimidated, or unwilling to be jurors. Recently, a District Attorney in Texas revealed that he is counting on selecting jurors based on their openness and candor on Facebook. It facilitates the attorneys’ attempts to gauge a potential juror’s objectivity and impartiality (or lack thereof) by reading voluntarily postings, which are uncensored and written in his or her own words, rather than asking the person to answer honestly and formally in a courtroom. Although it remains to be codified, having the judicial system turn to social media is a sign of things to come.
This begs the question – will privacy remain private?