Limiting a Juror's Access to Information in Criminal Justice

CRIMINAL JUSTICE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note

1CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Evaluation of the reason for the rules limiting a juror’s access to information
There is a fear among the courts and commentators that jurors having access to internet
would be biased towards the proceedings of the trial. It has been observed that the court rules and
the jury instructions have been designed in such a way that it ensures that the jurors can consider
evidence that have been admitted only at the appropriate time. The neutrality of a jury can only
make the search for justice possible. For the avoidance of verdicts that are being motivated
politically, the jury needs to be free of any personal knowledge in relation to the facts of the case.
A mistrial would be created if it is found out by the court that there has been use of technology
by any juror for research purpose or for tweeting or messaging an outsider. In such cases a new
trial would have to be started (Marder, 2015).
Should guilt or innocence only use information gathered in compliance with
the Constitution and approved by the judge
As per the exclusionary rule the government is prevented from using evidence that had
been collected in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America. The rule has been
grounded in the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and the intention of it is the protection of
the citizens from any type of illegal search or seizure (Re, 2013). It can be agreed that if the
investigation is done in a correct way then the evidence that has been collected in compliance
with the Constitution and the judge’s approval would be enough for proving guilt or innocence.