Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8] ]

Subject: Re: Secret Jurors? Author: Observer [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 14:08:09 08/17/11 Wed In reply to: Matt Brewington 's message, "Secret Jurors?" on 11:49:04 08/11/11 Thu Some interesting reading that may help clarify the issue here: http://federalistblog.us/2008/10/freedom_of_speech_and_of_the_press/ In particular regarding anonymous jury: http://www.rcfp.org/secretjustice/anonymousjuries/survey.html Which lead to "What is 'interference with judicial process'?" (which would seem to be the only plausable justification under the analysis above): http://supreme.justia.com/us/328/331/case.html and http://supreme.justia.com/us/314/252/case.html Personally, I don't think it really matters one way or the other if the jurors are nameless but from what I read here I don't think the prosecution has a leg to stand on in justifying the request. I do wonder how they intend to "provide the jury with a neutral, non-prejudicial reason for their anonymity". If I was his lawyer, I am pretty sure I would object to the motion. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date Re: Secret Jurors? thepoint 14:13:14 08/17/11 Wed