For several years, we at Lawyers Alert have been touting the benefits of "tech" and social media for lawyers and law firms. Jaffe PR has written often of the need for lawyers to embrace social media like blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn, even Facebook. Contributor Gerry Riskin is an avid blogger himself. Few in the know will dispute the value such activities can add to the legal industry.
But there are limits to the merits of these activities. Courts now are starting to grapple with these limits as they deal with the growing prevalence of jurors texting, e-mailing, "Tweeting," blogging and otherwise using the Internet and tech tools to research and communicate improperly while involved in trials.
From the U.K., to the U.S., to Canada and beyond, jurors have been dismissed and/or chastised for going online to research criminal law principles, texting each other during closing arguments to discuss the merits of the case, "friending" each other on Facebook during trials, and even "Tweeting" play-by-play updates on the progress of trials. Some such instances have resulted in costly mistrials and appeals.
In response, many jurisdictions are adopting so-called "Twitter Instructions" to judges, and specific jury instructions emphasizing the need to avoid using these tools. Many courthouses now have specific policies banning phones, pagers, PDAs and other electronic devices not only from the courtroom, but now from the jury room as well.
These bans and policies may help while jurors are within the court buildings, but judges continue to struggle with how to dissuade jurors from using these tools and devices at home. In the past, the concern was with television and newspaper coverage. Now, Google, Wikipedia and other online tools have become so commonplace they are almost second-nature to many jurors. Is it so different? Or is it simply the same problem with a different face? We'll continue to monitor these developments for further discussion in Lawyers Alert.