Sequestration Pros and Cons. More on the George Zimmerman trial. Although most of the coverage of the George Zimmerman trial has, understandably, focused on the defendant and victim, we should not forget the toll on the jurors. As I have written before, jury service can be quite stressful for jurors, and that is especially true in long trials with serious charges, complex evidence, and emotional testimony. All of these factors are compounded by sequestration, as in the Zimmerman case. CBS News reported that it cost over $350,000 to sequester the six jurors: $33,000 for their lodging, food, etc. at a Marriott Hotel for the 22-day trial; and $320,000 for the sheriffs who supervised and protected them. There are multiple ways of looking at this. On the one hand, $353,000 comes to $2674 per juror per day. That doesn’t seem so outrageous, and it is an acceptable expense to ensure a fair trial, especially in a murder case. On the other hand, it is not at all clear how much fairer sequestration—which is, fortunately, a very rare practice—really makes a trial. Yes, it shields jurors from outside influence, assuming the common practices of preventing them from accessing TV, newspapers, Internet, and common gossip are effective. All such “connectivity” was screened by sheriff’s deputies. Let’s assume that it worked; and let’s accept, moreover, the research showing that exposure to publicity about a trial can bias jurors’ verdicts. continue to.. psychologytoday/blog/the-jurys-trials/201308/sequestration-pros-and-cons
Posted on: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 19:54:42 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015