2011.07.07 Media's Motion for Release of Juror Names

[yolorado]

FL has wide open sunshine laws but I see no reason to release these names. They've spoken. IMO, they made a very, very bad decision, but it's done. I think there are are serious security concerns for these people. If they want to speak, they should. However, in the future we must find ways which assure jurors are absolutely prohibited from taking any payment or benefit if they choose to speak. Jury service should be more like the draft ...almost impossible to get out of, far fewer reasons for eliminating jurors, very, very little change of venue or sequestrating, so that we truly get a more representative subsection of the public in the location where the crime occurred. I think sequestration may lead to group mentality in ways that are not conducive to true justice. Jurors should be paid far more, and especially in high profile cases paid very well to defray the inconvenience and financial hardship of service. Jurors should be allowed anonymity after service and not be required to justify their decisions to anyone...even if they are horribly, horribly wrong. We need to work on passing a variety of laws which hopefully someday will make it harder to get away with murder.

 

[*JMO*]

I think a juror should have the option to go public or not realizing that the choice may be made for them anyway since co-workers, relatives, neighbors, etc could sell them out.

At the same time, I do not believe a juror should be able to profit by disclosing their names and speaking for everyone else on the jury. I think it is a slippery slope to profit off of jury service..yes, they made a sacrifice..but I think too much integrity is at stake when the jurors see dollar signs.

Just writing this, I'm conflicted on the release of names. I am just speaking for myself..I am a very private person and the thought that I would be forced into the limelight against my wishes would change my whole mindset about serving on a jury.

 

[nephers]

I think JP will wait a week or so to release the names. I believe he has to but it's smart to give it a "cooling off" period. I think the names should be released on the same day ICA is released. That way the focus will be on her not the jurors. Regardless of what you think of the verdict, the jurors shouldn't be harmed and there is a serious risk of that right now.

 

[gmt]

I hated the verdict, and if a juror goes to media or is paid in any way release that persons name, for any other NO way do I support it. Not right to people who serve on a jury, but want to keep their privacy for their family and neighbors. Mob, drug cartel cases , high profile murder cases ??? what if you had to serve on one of these. Let them give comments ask by media by written form and juror number, so we know why they voted the way they did. They hear how much we hate the verdict.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't want their names released. It is hard enough these days to get jurors to take part in long, complex trials. If one single thing happens to a juror, even if it is not life-threatening, it will just make it more difficult in the future.

 

[mombomb]

I transcribed the media hearing and it is in the sentencing thread because this thread was not started yet. I found this hearing to be fascinating. I am hoping that this case is going to highlight things in our judicial process that need to be changed in order to keep up with the changes in our society.

This was an interesting argument made in this hearing. I don't feel the jury needs to be hounded or harassed. However, there was an interesting argument made by one of the media lawyers. In small communities, jurors are all known to all participants and that is the way it was back in the day. I think that those juries, IMOO, might tend to be a little more thoughtful and thorough in their decision of judging a fellow community member because their friends and neighbors know who they are. That is the reason that they are giving as to why they are arguing against anonymous juries - but it's probably just so that they can get higher ratings. Although, it's odd that many of the jurors appear to already be known. I wasn't clear if she was saying that they knew, or if it was other less reputable "journalists" who had found them out.

 

[gmt]

P.S. I will not lie like KC just to avoid jury duty, for those who say I have a choice to serve.

 

[Roze]

If it's the law that the names be released, they should be released. End of story. We're currently having to accept the law that decided KC's fate.

 

[dunlurken]

You can bet your sweet azz I won't serve on a jury if they release the names. Won't happen. The media needs a HUGE SLAP IN THE FACE!

 

[BeanE]

I don't want their names released. It is hard enough these days to get jurors to take part in long, complex trials. If one single thing happens to a juror, even if it is not life-threatening, it will just make it more difficult in the future.

Judge Perry detailed some of the threats. One juror - and their family and CHILDREN - were contacted before they even left the courthouse.

These jurors need to be protected, and so do their families and CHILDREN.

This is nuts.

 

[Chablis]

I don't want their names released. It is hard enough these days to get jurors to take part in long, complex trials. If one single thing happens to a juror, even if it is not life-threatening, it will just make it more difficult in the future.

If anything happens to any juror, I have a feeling lots of laws may change. I find it so bizarre the threat, these people want to "filet" others because they were on a jury and didn't make the popular emotional verdict, and somehow thats better than what Casey did and would be justified. I hope the names are not released, but I know they will be.

 

[MissJames]

I am conflicted . I would hate for future jurors to feel they have to make decisions based on pubic opinion and threats,but if an exception is made for this jury every FL juror will want anonymity.
What I would like to see is a law that makes it illegal to make money on anything resulting from your jury duty. That just paves the way for stealth jurors with an agenda.

 

[rossva]

I agree 100%. I can not think of even one reason the public needs to know the names of the jurors.

I can't see why it is important to release the names of the jurors. The decisions were unamious.

 

[costalpilot]

jurors have no legal right of anonymity. never have.

 

[Chablis]

You can bet your sweet azz I won't serve on a jury if they release the names. Won't happen. The media needs a HUGE SLAP IN THE FACE!

Did anyone notice how Perry tried to almost guilt that journalist, and he said he hopes people really start taking a look at what journalism is. I almost thought he was trying to morally get her to do the right thing and withdrawl.

 

[gmt]

I guess it is not being aired? I looked all over for it what channel did you see it on BeanE?

Grndmaj take off those sunglasses and put your bifocals back on.:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:Bet it will help you out alittle.LOL

 

[mag84]

He recessed already. I believe it will be a few days before he decide. Dont quote me on that because i got the feed right as he said a couple days and the court is in recess.

WESH had it on live, I just happened to still have that feed open. HHJP said he has something this afternoon that will leave him hurting or something like that for a few days (sounded to me like maybe a root canal or something - just my guess) and that "they wouldn't get anything tomorrow". It's obvious he doesn't want to release the names, but I don't think he has much of a choice. I'd expect a decision maybe Monday, but he didn't give a time frame.

 

[LambChop]

Not sure why the media would pay for any of their stories. They pretty much had nothing to say that we did not already know. jmo

 

[wvjules]

So what happens if there was jury tampering? Is double jeopardy still attached?

 

[allycat1208]

For the jury protection, I think the juror names should not be disclosed. On the other hand, if their name are not released how would anyone ever know if who ever talks to the media was really a juror member?