Maybe they should end sequestering of juries, so that they can not only listen to the actual testimony given in court, but can then listen to hours upon hours of pundits on cable television programs arguing over what that testimony really means.
Then we wouldn't have stunned jurists.
Actually, I can think of no good reason to sequester a jury, or have a judge to tell them what to consider or disregard in the way of testimony. If a trial is all about finding the truth, the more information the better.