If I’m a defense attorney trying the case, and I hear that two jurors dined together alone one night in the hotel, I might wonder if the case came up, but I doubt I’d be able to convince a judge that there is reason to hold a hearing about it. I might even decide I don’t WANT to make a stink about it for fear of angering jurors for making a specious allegation.

If I’m a defense attorney trying the case, and I hear that two jurors are having a sexual relationship, I am not so willing to assume the court’s instructions were followed. I think the intimacy of the relationship is enough to warrant asking some simple questions of the jurors. Maybe it’s nothing; I don’t think the relationship necessarily means something improper happened. But I agree with Gideon that a hearing is warranted. We share things with intimate friends and lovers that we don’t share with others. Maybe these two people are just having fun, but maybe they’ve developed a trust for each other and have confided in each other in a way that violated the court’s instructions and denied the defendant a fair trial. It’s worth asking.

Can I get a list of the books you read?

Thanks

That’s why the hearing.

They’re locked up in a hotel sequestered, and while they’re supposed to spend some amount of time deliberating, I don’t see any fundamental difference for them to spend their down time (so to speak) getting down vs. reading a book or something. Say they spent their free time playing bridge — would that be, properly, the cause for a new trial?

Now, if it were during deliberations, and they were running a small duplicate game . . .

“Two spades. I dunno. Didn’t sound like self-defense. What do you think?”

“Pass.”

“Was that a bid, or did you just not want to comment?”

“Both.”

“Okay. Three no trump. I’m sure that it was self-defense.”

“Double.”

“Lead.”

“No, I meant that I’m sure, too. I just pass . . . ”

I think there’d be a good argument. But the essence would be doing something else instead of deliberating rather than enjoying the downtime in an unusual way.

That make any sense at all?

How did this sexual relationship affect their ability to independently asses the facts and come to their own conclusion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant?

Jurors are the 6 or 12 people deciding the fate of the defendant. It is imperative that they take their jobs seriously. With allegations like these, it is necessary to conduct a thorough hearing to determine whether any of the jurors took their job less than seriously.