“Accessing jurors’ names would not significantly add to the public’s ability to assure itself that voir dire is fairly conducted or to check the courts in disregarding established standards for jury selection,” she wrote. Timmer continued by concluding fairness in the realm of juror selection may be safeguarded by opposing parties and the time-tested juror selection process. Consequently, although voir dire examinations and trials are open for public viewing, observers are not provided jurors’ names absent order of the court.”
“Under that procedure, prospective and impaneled jurors are referred to by numbers rather than by names throughout open-court proceedings, although the court and the parties know their identities. “The superior court in Cochise County uses ‘innominate juries’ for all criminal jury trials,” she wrote, in the majority opinion. She claimed they’re typically disclosed during the “voir dire” or juror examination process, but not in any other standard interest. However, in Tuesday's findings, Vice Chief Justice Timmer argued that courts did not divulge the jurors’ names compulsorily. Steele argued that juror transparency could play a role in ensuring racial dynamics are in accordance with the decency that should be afforded to a defendant. In April, the journalists represented by Evan Stele from the First Amendment Clinic at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law argued that transparency in the judicial process served a compelling interest. “ state plainly has a compelling interest in enforcing it to protect juror privacy,” Justice Clint Bolick wrote, in his concurrence with the majority decision. The Arizona Supreme Court cited Article 2 Section 8 of the Arizona Constitution in supporting an individual’s right to privacy “o person shall be disturbed in his private … without authority of law.” Morgan is a former Courthouse News employee. Terri Jo Neff, a freelance journalist based in Cochise County, and David Morgan, publisher of the Cochise County Record, filed special actions in each case over the restrictive procedures. Before Covid-19, reporters could view the juror selection process in person and see the jurors participating in a trial. The judge in those cases referred to the jurors by numbers instead of their names, masking the jurors’ identities. The case stems from two Covid-era criminal trials in rural Cochise County, where juror names remained anonymous during and after the trial. PHOENIX (CN) - In a unanimous decision on Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against the petitioners in a case involving a presumptive First Amendment right to juror names.
0 kommentar(er)
