Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: reaganaut
Morning! I found these paragraphs interesting:

He (Judge Perry) specifically called for the state Legislature to consider whether an exemption "barring release of jurors’ names, albeit limited to specific, rare cases, is needed in order to protect the safety and well-being of those citizens willing to serve."

Court administration for the Ninth Circuit or the Pinellas County Clerk of Court may upon request release the names of the 14 seated jurors who have not already voluntarily released their names on or after Oct. 25, the order states.

13 posted on 07/27/2011 6:46:22 AM PDT by truthkeeper (Vote Against Barack Obama in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: truthkeeper

I disagree with the exemption, as it is difficult to prove to a legal standard that the jurors WOULD be harmed if their names were released at the later date, so a permanent exemption is not a good idea.


20 posted on 07/27/2011 7:04:26 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: truthkeeper

The reason the jurors names are released at all is for some accountability and to prevent jury tampering and misconduct. If someone when into a jury knowing that they would forever remain anonymous, that would be problematic at best for the system.

Early juries (Saxon) were comprised of well known people in the area who knew the offenders and could size people up quickly.


21 posted on 07/27/2011 7:07:09 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost, but now am found; was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson