Should jurors be given the juror handbook to read while they are waiting in the assembly room? Should jurors have to sign a form confirming they have read and understood it, and that any questions they had were answered to their satisfaction? Should they be given a simple multiple choice test as is done with the DMV handbook? Should the handbook be available for reading/downloading on the jury duty section of all court district websites?
It should not be hard to guess that my answer to all of these questions is a resounding “Yes.” In my experience, most people are not aware of the existence of handbooks for trial jurors (sometimes referred to as petit jurors), as well as one for grand jurors. An internet search allowed me to easily find sample handbooks for both. The links below point to the books on the USCourts.gov website. I encourage my readers to read them. Take note of the fact that they are quite short and relatively easy to read. They provide a basic explanation of how trials work, the role of jurors, some definitions of legal terms, job descriptions of the officials that jurors will meet in court, and other basic information.
Trial (Petit) Juror Handbook (USCourts.gov) (Automatically downloads the book in PDF format to your downloads folder):
http://www.uscourts.gov/file/2802/download
Grand Juror Handbook (USCourts.gov) (Automatically downloads the book in PDF format to your downloads folder)
http://www.uscourts.gov/file/2804/download
Based on my informal Internet research, most counties have their own versions of these documents which are negligibly different than the ones linked above. Some counties (such as the county in which I live—Wake County (Raleigh), NC) do not link to a juror handbook on the “Jury Duty” section of the government website, nor even mention the existence of such. It just says that jurors will be given instructions in court—presumably verbally, and without any way of testing or confirming juror comprehension.
I served for 19 days as a grand juror in Queens, NY. We didn't serve on one major case like the kind that might be covered by the news media. Instead, we listened to what may have been 100 cases (each lasting an average of 15 minutes or so in total), and voted whether to indict in each case. At no point were we handed any type of grand juror handbook which of course implies that we were not expected to read such. This also implies that we did not have to sign any paperwork confirming that we have read and understood our role as grand jurors. Our role was explained to us verbally while most of the grand jurors were staring blankly at the wall or straining to stay awake. We weren't even individually asked if we understood everything that was said. It goes without saying that we were in no way formally tested on whether we understood what our role was as well as its significance.
When I was called to serve on trial jury duty in Queens, jurors in the waiting room were shown a short and “cheesy” (for lack of a better word) video on a small TV screen which explained the very basics of what it means to be a juror. The tone of it was somewhat reminiscent of an infomercial. The court clerk did not invite us to ask questions, and there was certainly no trial juror handbook in sight. I had the exact same experience when I recently served on jury duty in Raleigh, NC, with the only difference being that in the waiting room there were copies of the Judeo-Christian bible everywhere the eye could see, but not one copy of the juror handbook to be found. I am disappointed that I didn't think to ask the court clerk if she could provide me with a copy of one to borrow.
I am reluctant to say any more because I don't want my readers to accuse me of focusing on issues related to Queens and Raleigh. Having said that, I have not come across any anecdotal evidence of jurors in any way being tested to ensure that they understand what they are expected to do. What immediately comes to mind is one of the steps that is required to obtain a driver's license. People applying for a driver's license are expected to study the DMV handbook whether in print or electronic form. It is significantly lengthier than the juror handbook, and unlike the juror handbook, it includes charts, tables, and diagrams. Applicants are expected to pass a short, simple multiple-choice test on the content. They are permitted to retake the test if they fail. Illiterate applicants may ask to have the questions read to them. Note that I cover the topic of illiterate jurors elsewhere in the book.
My point is simply that in order to be permitted to operate a potentially 26,000-pound vehicle at relatively high speeds, a person is expected to jump through some basic “hoops” in order to prove that they have at least a rudimentary understanding of the “rules of the road.” It may be a time-consuming “pain in the ass,” and some would argue that it's “total BS,” but everyone does it. If we return our focus to jury duty, though, we find no such analogous test. There is no tangible written evidence that a juror understands, for example, the concept of applying the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” when deciding whether to find a defendant guilty in a criminal trial. Having said that, I do understand and agree that administering a DMV-style written test to jurors would be a logistical nightmare and a huge financial expense, and would lead to accusations of discrimination if the pass rate was not perfectly aligned with the county's demographics.
Having said all of that, America needs to make up its mind. If we are not going to give jurors a handbook and a token quiz, we might as well stop doing such at DMV offices, save the taxpayer money involved, and just hope for the best. If we are going to continue asking prospective drivers to read a simple handbook and take a simple test (both of which are more than reasonable), then a prospective juror should also be asked to read a simple handbook and take a simple test to see if s/he is in a position to make a potentially monumental (and in some cases irreversible) judgment.
Go to Next Topic
Go to Table to Contents
Trial (Petit) Juror Handbook (USCourts.gov) (Automatically downloads the book in PDF format to your downloads folder):
http://www.uscourts.gov/file/2802/download
Grand Juror Handbook (USCourts.gov) (Automatically downloads the book in PDF format to your downloads folder)
http://www.uscourts.gov/file/2804/download
Based on my informal Internet research, most counties have their own versions of these documents which are negligibly different than the ones linked above. Some counties (such as the county in which I live—Wake County (Raleigh), NC) do not link to a juror handbook on the “Jury Duty” section of the government website, nor even mention the existence of such. It just says that jurors will be given instructions in court—presumably verbally, and without any way of testing or confirming juror comprehension.
I served for 19 days as a grand juror in Queens, NY. We didn't serve on one major case like the kind that might be covered by the news media. Instead, we listened to what may have been 100 cases (each lasting an average of 15 minutes or so in total), and voted whether to indict in each case. At no point were we handed any type of grand juror handbook which of course implies that we were not expected to read such. This also implies that we did not have to sign any paperwork confirming that we have read and understood our role as grand jurors. Our role was explained to us verbally while most of the grand jurors were staring blankly at the wall or straining to stay awake. We weren't even individually asked if we understood everything that was said. It goes without saying that we were in no way formally tested on whether we understood what our role was as well as its significance.
When I was called to serve on trial jury duty in Queens, jurors in the waiting room were shown a short and “cheesy” (for lack of a better word) video on a small TV screen which explained the very basics of what it means to be a juror. The tone of it was somewhat reminiscent of an infomercial. The court clerk did not invite us to ask questions, and there was certainly no trial juror handbook in sight. I had the exact same experience when I recently served on jury duty in Raleigh, NC, with the only difference being that in the waiting room there were copies of the Judeo-Christian bible everywhere the eye could see, but not one copy of the juror handbook to be found. I am disappointed that I didn't think to ask the court clerk if she could provide me with a copy of one to borrow.
I am reluctant to say any more because I don't want my readers to accuse me of focusing on issues related to Queens and Raleigh. Having said that, I have not come across any anecdotal evidence of jurors in any way being tested to ensure that they understand what they are expected to do. What immediately comes to mind is one of the steps that is required to obtain a driver's license. People applying for a driver's license are expected to study the DMV handbook whether in print or electronic form. It is significantly lengthier than the juror handbook, and unlike the juror handbook, it includes charts, tables, and diagrams. Applicants are expected to pass a short, simple multiple-choice test on the content. They are permitted to retake the test if they fail. Illiterate applicants may ask to have the questions read to them. Note that I cover the topic of illiterate jurors elsewhere in the book.
My point is simply that in order to be permitted to operate a potentially 26,000-pound vehicle at relatively high speeds, a person is expected to jump through some basic “hoops” in order to prove that they have at least a rudimentary understanding of the “rules of the road.” It may be a time-consuming “pain in the ass,” and some would argue that it's “total BS,” but everyone does it. If we return our focus to jury duty, though, we find no such analogous test. There is no tangible written evidence that a juror understands, for example, the concept of applying the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” when deciding whether to find a defendant guilty in a criminal trial. Having said that, I do understand and agree that administering a DMV-style written test to jurors would be a logistical nightmare and a huge financial expense, and would lead to accusations of discrimination if the pass rate was not perfectly aligned with the county's demographics.
Having said all of that, America needs to make up its mind. If we are not going to give jurors a handbook and a token quiz, we might as well stop doing such at DMV offices, save the taxpayer money involved, and just hope for the best. If we are going to continue asking prospective drivers to read a simple handbook and take a simple test (both of which are more than reasonable), then a prospective juror should also be asked to read a simple handbook and take a simple test to see if s/he is in a position to make a potentially monumental (and in some cases irreversible) judgment.
Go to Next Topic
Go to Table to Contents