Preview of Member Only Content
For full access: or Become a Member
U.S. v. Daugerdas: A Cautionary Tale About Investigating Jurors (Informal Opinion)
By Thaddeus Hoffmeister
Informal Opinion columns.
As of late, there have been increased accounts of attorneys using the Internet, especially social media, to learn valuable information about jurors. For example, a criminal defense attorney uncovered the following Facebook posting by a juror after the first day of a two-day criminal trial.
[A]ctually excited for jury duty tomorrow. It’s gonna be fun to tell the defendant they’re GUILTY.1
In another example, a prospective juror in the Casey Anthony trial sent the following tweet.
Cops in Florida are idiots and completely useless.2
What attorney would not want this type of information?
Yet, despite the obvious benefits to the practitioner, there are some real perils associated with investigating or researching jurors. This essay will highlight some of those concerns by briefly examining United States v. Daugerdas.3 This case illustrates the problems that can arise from juror investigations.
Largest Tax Fraud Case in U.S. History
Daugerdas is the largest criminal tax fraud case i
Want to read more?
The Champion archive is reserved for NACDL members.
NACDL members, please login to read the rest of this article.
Not a member? Join now.
Or click here to see an overview of NACDL Member benefits.
See what NACDL members say about us.
To read the current issue of The Champion in its entirety, click here.
- Media inquiries: Contact NACDL's Director of Public Affairs & Communications Ivan J. Dominguez at 202-465-7662 or email@example.com
- Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.