☰ In this section

The Champion

July 2003 , Page 52 

Search the Champion Looking for something specific?

Preview of Member Only Content

For full access: login or Become a Member Join Now

Limits on anonymous juries

By Barry Tarlow

Read more RICO Report columns.

The Constitution guarantees a defendant the right to the judgment of his peers. Until recently, it was assumed that the accused and the public, were entitled to know which of the defendant’s peers sat in judgment.  

High-profile trials, involving either allegedly dangerous members of organized crime, or intense media interest in every aspect of the trial, have led to a phenomenon unknown three decades ago — the anonymous jury. Former Louisiana Governor, United States Congressman, and State Supreme Court Justice Edwin Edwards, who was tried by an anonymous jury for political corruption, described the inconsistency of anonymous juries with the constitutional mandate: “It is contrary to the concept of being tried by your peers in a community where you know the jurors and they know you.” Ashley Gauthier, Secret Justice: Anonymous Juries (on the website of the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press, http://www.recfp.org).  

The threshold the prosecution must meet to keep from the

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.
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 idominguez@nacdl.org
  • Academic Requests: Full articles of The Champion Magazine are available for academic and research purposes in the WestLaw and LexisNexis databases.
Advertisement Advertise with Us

In This Section

Advertisement Advertise with Us