New FL Law Took Affect 1/1/09 Jurors Will Now Be Permitted To Ask Witnesses Question.

CW

Former Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
6,204
Reaction score
47
Website
Visit site
Of course they will have to sumit the question to the judge and then the judge will make the decision if the jurors question can be read to the witness. IMO This ruling will be used alot in Casey's upcoming trial. With all the lie's (Half Truths) that have been told by this family the jurors will have their work cut out for them and I believe it will be a big help to them in deciding Casey's guilt or innocences.

What is your all's opinion?

Juror Questions Improve Search For Truth
The Tampa Tribune

Published: December 27, 2007

Starting New Year's Day, Florida jurors will be allowed to ask questions of witnesses in civil and criminal trials.

The Florida Supreme Court adopted the new rule last fall to help jurors get at the truth, but the court's controversial decision has some judges and lawyers fretting about the potential for problems.

Justice Peggy Quince, for one, objects to the rule
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/dec/27/na-juror-questions-improve-search-for-truth/
 
That is interesting. Kind of like a Grand Jury Hearing.

The judge in this case will certainly have his/her work cut out for them.

I wonder if she does not testify if they can still ask her a question.
 
well, I am not a lawyer or a judge, but it seems to me if the jury has a question they want answered, they ought to get an answer.
 
The lawyers will object themselves hoarse.

I wonder if they'd have to submit the question to the judge in writing in order to determine the fairness or validity of the question.

They'd have to gag me and tie my hands to the back of the chair if God smiled upon me enough to sit on this jury. "But why?" "Does she think we're ignorant?" "What was the deal with the shov..."
 
I'm not a lawyer nor a judge either but imo I believe questions will only be permitted to witnesses on the witness stand. IMO if Casey does not testify the jurors will not be permitted to ask her questions but I could very well be wrong.
 
If this questioning is allowed with this case, we may never see an outcome in our lifetime. Yikes! I know with me personally one question begets more questions. This could go on for a very long time. Wonder if there's a limit to how many questions you can ask. Very interesting.
 
If this questioning is allowed with this case, we may never see an outcome in our lifetime. Yikes! I know with me personally one question begets more questions. This could go on for a very long time. Wonder if there's a limit to how many questions you can ask. Very interesting.

Give me my Blackberry and WS's here and I could keep that judge's desktop totally full of questions. It sure would be fun though.
 
Give me my Blackberry and WS's here and I could keep that judge's desktop totally full of questions. It sure would be fun though.

Yes, yes, we could. I agree taht it would be loads of fun, maybe not for the witness but fun for us and finally get some questions answered.
 
Nevada has this law, and the first time I saw it used was in the trial of Darren Mack - wealthy Reno businessman. Darren Mack murdered his ex-wife by stabbing her to death, and attempted to kill the judge who presided over their divorce by shooting him as he sat in his courthouse chambers......the judge survived.

The trial of Darren Mack was in October-November 2007, with sentencing in February 2008. It was live-streamed online, so we got to watch the whole trial.

During the trial, when both the prosecution and defense had no further questions of a witness, the judge would ask if the jurors had questions. If any raised their hand, the baliff would collect their written questions and give them to the judge. The judge would read a question to himself, and then read the question aloud to the witness and courtroom. If there was a similar question from another juror, the judge would ask, "Juror number 7 - did the answer from the witness answer your question or do you want to ask something more specific?"

Most of those who watched the trial live agreed that the questions from the jurors were good questions, some that the attorneys should have asked.
 
I sat on a case in NJ where we were able to ask questions. The witness kept giving contradictory answers to her testimony. She was clearly lying.
 
I think this is most excellent. The last two times I served on a jury, myself and several other jurors expressed frustration that what seemed to be important, basic questions were not asked. I will be anxious to see how this plays out in a case
 
I think this is most excellent. The last two times I served on a jury, myself and several other jurors expressed frustration that what seemed to be important, basic questions were not asked. I will be anxious to see how this plays out in a case

I followed the Bobby Cutts murder trial - Ohio, start to finish, and the jurors were allowed to ask questions.
First time I had ever seen that done, great news they will allow it now in FL.
 
This is a great new law! I look forward to seeing how it will work in this case!
 
Only a witness that has been sworn in can answer any questions at trial and it will be no different with written questions from the jurors.

I am sure there will be all sorts of safe guards to ensure that irrelevant questions or those which go outside the boundaries of the direct and cross examination are not read aloud before the attorneys have been able to make their objections etc.

I like this idea very much. I also like the idea that jurors are allowed to take notes during the trial. Not all states allow this either.
 
What a great idea! Though this is the first I have heard of it, I am certainly all for it. Those deciding the fate of another person should definately be allowed to ask questions that will help them make an accurate and informed decision. Lol, RR0004, you may be right. In this case, there will be many, many questions.
 
I'm not a lawyer nor a judge either but imo I believe questions will only be permitted to witnesses on the witness stand. IMO if Casey does not testify the jurors will not be permitted to ask her questions but I could very well be wrong.

I also think this may keep her off the stand.
 
We have that in Arizona also. The judge reads the written question, then calls both attorneys to the bench. If there is no objection, the question is asked of the sworn in witness.
 
We have that rule where I live. The jurors don't use it much...the Judges usually make sure of it. When they ask questions, they have to leave court for the judge and lawyers to discuss how to deal with it etc, and it's usually questions the lawyers plan to ask at some point anyhow. I doubt they'll use it much.
 
I think this will be great. So many jurers I have heard comment that they wished they would have asked this or that and they could have felt better about deciding a verdict, some they even said had they known the answer to something they would have voted differently. It makes good sense to me .
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
2,388
Total visitors
2,554

Forum statistics

Threads
589,981
Messages
17,928,625
Members
228,029
Latest member
Truthseeker158
Back
Top