Essay on Zimmerman Juror Replacement

Introduction

Jurors are members of the jury who are responsible for airing out a verdict after hearing the case given to them. In most cases, jurors are not subjected to the public attention due to the critical decisions that they are deemed to provide. In that perspective, the disclosure of jurors to the general information will alter their verdict (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). Alteration takes place as the jurors are made to develop the fear of airing out a judgment which is usually against the public attention. In spite of the fact that the public has the right to access information, it is critically insecure to let the names or address of jurors to the public (Savage, 2013). This paper seeks to analyze the efficacy of hiding or disclosing jurors' information to the public and whether it is right to let jurors address and other information about them to be subject to public's information.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Regardless of the fact that the public has the right to information, the right to privacy and secure life surpasses the latter. In most instances, the disclosure of jurors names leads to a freak in the course of airing the verdict. Also, during the court's session, a wrong or unintended decision might be given due to the fear of rowdy public's behavior towards the contrary of what they usually expect (Gardner & Anderson, 2016). There are often some unknown reasons that jurors use to determine the verdict of court cases that make it necessary to avoid the disclosure of their identity to the public. For instance, juror E54 alluded to the voice witness at Sanford Gated Community. The juror outlined that he the ear witnesses "helped him fill the gap" of the testimony and evidence that were presented to the court (Savage, 2013). According to the interview with E54, it can be outlined that jurors usually consider several matters to come up to a required and reasonable verdict even though the criteria might be slightly contrary to what the public demands. For that matter, it is right to hide the identity of jurors to secure their smooth working conditions and to ensure that they produce the best of their service to the society (Gardner & Anderson, 2016).

According to juror E54's statement that he could personally tell the person who was screaming on the 911 telephone, it can be so reprimanding to let the juror's identity to be known to the public (Savage, 2013). Savage (2013) outlined that it will raise security issues to him regarding the kind of thought that the relatives and friends of the person whose identified voice could think of the juror. In a layman's language, the disclosure of jurors to the public alters the verdict, subjects the jurors to the personal security threat and affects their social life while they resume to their normal life after their service at the court.

Conclusion

In case the jurors have to be disclosed to the public, then a panel of jurors should be used while finding a conclusion regarding a particular case. For that matter, it will be right for making an anonymous decision which will render no juror to any public's demands of accusation of fairness or lack of consideration in determining the case (Schipani & Seyhun, 2016). Therefore, it is risky to disclose jurors' data to the public especially if a single juror is responsible for giving a verdict. To enhance the public's demand, it is a right idea to consider employing a panel of jurors to determine a particular case.

References

Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2016). Criminal evidence: Principles and cases. Cengage. ISBN13: 978-1-285-45900-4.

Savage, M., P. (2013). Interview With Zimmerman Juror E54. Exclusive Fox 35, Wolf Orlando. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp_ccZub4FcSchipani, C. A., & Seyhun, H. N. (2016). Defining Material, Nonpublic: What Should Constitute Illegal Insider Information. Fordham J. Corp. & Fin. L., 21, 327.