Skip to content

Facebook Use By Jury Foreman Leads To Appeal

One overly social jury foreman in Missouri is serving as a cautionary tale about the dangers of Facebook during trials. The case began during a 2009 medical malpractice wrongful death case…

Published:

One overly social jury foreman in Missouri is serving as a cautionary tale about the dangers of Facebook during trials. The case began during a 2009 medical malpractice wrongful death case and the foreman wasted no time talking to friends online about his time on the jury. He mentioned his first day, discussed the trial itself, what happened during deliberations and even complained about the lack of alcoholic beverages.

The jury foreman was clearly interested in speeding the process along, even bragging about how fast he was pushing the deliberation process. The jury ultimately ruled in favor of the doctors and awarded nothing to the family of the patient who went to the hospital with a swollen leg, was misdiagnosed and eventually died as a result of brain damage.

The family’s wrongful death attorney is now appealing the case, claiming that his client failed to get a fair trial given the jury foreman’s Facebook posts.

Though most judges nowadays instruct jurors to avoid talking about the case using social media, many jurors either fail to listen or don’t care about the warning. Just last year a murder conviction in Arkansas was thrown out after it was revealed that a juror had been tweeting about the case. Another case was thrown out in Maryland after a juror revealed that she was friends on MySpace with the defendant. In the most egregious example of juror misconduct, a man in England posted a poll of his friends about whether they believed the defendant in his sex assault case was guilty.

Though the jury foreman’s glib and insulting messages may have been made in error, there has to be proof that prejudice resulted before the verdict can be thrown out. Rather than watch what the juror said, the judge will be looking to see what his friends said in reply, given that this could show that the juror was being influenced by outside parties.

About the Editors: Our personal injury law firm has offices in Virginia (VA) and North Carolina (NC). The attorneys with the firm publish and edit articles on three Legal Examiner sites for the geographic areas of Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Northeast North Carolina as a pro bono service to the general public.

Legal Examiner Staffer

Legal Examiner Staffer

The Legal Examiner and our Affiliate Network strive to be the place you look to for news, context, and more, wherever your life intersects with the law.

All articles
Tags: Legal

More in Legal

See all
Understanding the Four Classifications of Injuries

Understanding the Four Classifications of Injuries

/
A Guide to Common Personal Injury Legal Terms

A Guide to Common Personal Injury Legal Terms

/
Norfolk Personal Injury Lawyers Working for You

Norfolk Personal Injury Lawyers Working for You

/

More from Legal Examiner Staffer

See all

Will the NHTSA Change Its Vehicle Recall Process?

/

Why Are More People Dying on US Roads?

/