During my career, I'v seen a few sequestered juries. Done as part of a high-profile trial, the judge would order that the jury be sequestered and rent a wing of a local hotel. Remove the televisions from the room, turn off the telephones. The jury was as locked up as they could be, short of housing them in a jail cell.
Sequestration was considered important, to keep the jury from being swayed by outside influences. To keep their thoughts and ideas solely within the bounds of the arguments and evidence as presented in the courtroom.
I note that the jurors in the Rittenhouse case were not (at least at the time of this writing) sequestered. I confess that I really do't understand why not, and I'm sure that the judge has his reasons. The logistics of sequestering a jury in this digital age would be complicated by the fact that nearly everyone uses wireless communications on a near-constant basis. I don't know if it is possible, today, to keep 12 free people insulated from outside influence. It is also impossible today to put 12 people in a room and have them agree n a given set of facts. I note that we have a Supreme Court of nine very intelligent people and they seldom agree on anything.
Still, we wait on the Rittenhouse verdict.
5 comments:
I read where a blm guy was taking photos of the jury and threatening revenge for a not guilty plea. Minnesota seems to be quite lawless until a conservative steps up to defend himself . Hope the kid gets freed but not holding my breath .
https://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2021/11/zero-fucks-given-achievement-unlocked.html
Concur that it would be impossible today to truly 'lock down' a jury today.
A mob would be visible. They would see to that.
There are already pallets of bricks staged in Kenosha right now. Odd how that always seems to happen before a lefty riot.
Post a Comment