The Clancy case, again.
Seems that there were three RN's on the jury, and they "provided information" to the jurors "based on their own experience and knowledge."
That's a serious no-no.
...Jurors are required to consider only evidence and expert testimony provided and cross-examined in court. They are not allowed to substitute their own expertise and then use that to pressure other jurors. As the judge explicitly stated in his instructions to the jury, “So if somebody has a question in that jury room, you are not allowed to try and answer it by anything other than through the exhibits and evidence you've heard.” This is the entire purpose of accredited experts in trials. And according to jurors in this very case, that instruction from the judge was deliberately and repeatedly violated by multiple pro-Clancy jurors....
No doubt that jurors across the land 'share their expertise' during jury deliberations, but this was the wrong place to do it.
So yes, they should be brought up on Contempt-of-Court charges. Maybe they'll get a juror who refuses to convict them.
No comments:
Post a Comment