To Google or not to Google, that is a Juror’s question

Social networking among jurors is trying judges’ patience

The Washington Post had an interesting article about the problem of jurors using the internet to communicate and research outside of the confines of the courtroom and deliberations.

Judges and legal experts are particularly concerned about how technology and culture are affecting jurors and a defendant’s right to a fair trial. The Internet has provided easy and instant access to newspaper archives, criminal records, detailed maps, legal opinions and social-networking sites, such as Facebook, all at the anonymous click of a mouse in jurors’ homes or on the tiny keyboards of their cellular phones.

While the article naturally discusses that judges might warn jurors not to use the internet during a trial, I wonder if other forces might work to combat the effects of this phenomenon.

It has been argued that lawyers have changed their strategies of argumentation in court to fit storylines familiar in public relations and popular culture (perhaps at the sacrifice of linear or logical argumentation).  If jurors use the Internet when they go home for the evening, perhaps there will be a push towards shorter one or two day trials. Perhaps lawyers will begin presenting arguments that are relevant to what is going on outside the courtroom (ie: arguing against media reports).  While the greater impact of these on the justice system isn’t immediately clear, many would embrace the idea of shorter trials.