…what we’ve all been waiting for…
…from my friends at disklabs…have a great weekend…
All posts by Perry L. Segal
Jurors take the Law, PDAs – and e-Discovery – into their Own Hands
Coming soon to a courtroom near you; sequestering with no access to electronic devices, and all movement and correspondence monitored – for the entirety of every trial. Got any better ideas?
On the heels of my post late last week about “Juror Jonathan“, comes the following story from the New York Times about jurors ignoring their judges’ admonishments and conducting their own online research during trials.
Courts have always operated on the honor system when it comes to non-sequestered juries. We hold out hope that when a judge issues jury instructions, they will be taken seriously and followed to the letter of the law. Unfortunately, we also know that individuals violate these rules all of the time. Sometimes they’re caught – sometimes not.
Now, virtually every PDA comes equipped with the ability to access the internet, so jurors can conveniently misbehave on their breaks! If our system of jurisprudence can’t get a handle on how to control juror misconduct, here’s the next place they’ll be getting a ‘handle’ on them:
Tips & Tricks: e-Discovery Dictionary: Volume I
…hat tip to my friends at EDD Update…
Jones Dykstra & Associates has created an e-Discovery dictionary which I think has the potential to be very useful to anyone unfamiliar with the territory. I’m going to keep an eye on it – maybe you should, too.
Sorry – I’ve Been at the ‘Bar’
…just wanted to drop in to say hello…
Normally, I try to post about three times a week. Recently, I was honored to be asked to write an analysis of California AB 5 for the State Bar of California’s Solo & Small Firm Section publication, “Trial Style”, so I’ve been squirreled away working on that.
Unfortunately, it’s an exclusive, so I can’t post it here until after it’s published (publish date TBD). I have more subjects in the queue so they’ll be up later in the week – maybe even tonight…
UPDATE – The editor has informed me that my article will likely be published in the June issue.
“Juror Jonathan” Gives Proceedings the ‘Bird’
This 29-year-old juror in Arkansas obviously didn’t read my post yesterday. He sent ‘tweets’ during a trial in which his jury awarded two Plaintiffs $12.6 million.
When I said evidence can be used for purposes most people don’t think about, this is exactly what I meant. In this case, the Defendant is making an argument of bias on the juror’s part as a basis for a motion seeking a new trial.
Actually, they raise a fascinating question of law (for people like me, anyway):
“Arkansas law requires defendants to prove that outside information
entered the jury room and corrupted a verdict — not that information
from the jury room made its way out.”
But does it really matter whether the motion is granted or denied? Look at the mess this juror has caused; in time, cost and possible (although unlikely) reversal.
Let’s face it – “Juror Jonathan” is out of his tree.
e-Discovery California: AB 5: To the Senate, We Go!
It’s Friday the 13th today. It’s Friday the 13th, today. Whoa…a little deja vu there…I swear I just said that a month ago…
As per legislative procedure, AB 5 was “approved” by the Assembly and is now in the “other house” (the Senate).
Have a great weekend. And please, don’t drink and ‘drive‘.
DUI: ‘Driving’ Under the Influence: Too Much ‘Fluid’ity
Sorry – I’m going after Twitter, MySpace & Facebook again…it seems somehow fitting a few days before St. Patrick’s Day…
Supposedly, we look at technology as a tool to make things easier for us in our daily lives. Yeah…easier for us to make damn fools of ourselves. Let’s do a
little ‘new’ math:
A + D + K/BP – J = T
Alcohol + Drugs + Keyboard/pad – Judgment = TROUBLE
When I was on the front lines of support, we had a great inside joke about the average ‘driver’ (in tech, we refer to the person operating the PC as the driver). It went like this:
Tech Support Guy #1: Great news! We figured out what’s wrong with Bob’s PC!
Tech Support Guy #2: Awesome! What’s the problem?
Tech Support Guy #1: It’s in-between the mouse and the chair…
(insert laughter and applause here)
Go back and read my two-part series on ESI. If you get anything at all out of the review, remember one word – and one word only – relevance. There still seems to be a disconnect with many of the people I speak with about what makes something evidence!
Let’s take a statement, for example. What was said, who said it, where it was said, when it was said and why it was said are all factors, of course. But what gets it in for the purposes of a legal matter is its relevance to the issue at hand.
Knowing this, why are you smoking joints and/or drinking a six-pack of beer, then running your mouth on your social network? And why are you posting those photos of you & the gang hoisting beers with the caption, “PARTYYY!!!” underneath?
You wanna make the ‘privacy’ argument? The law is fluid, not static. What’s illegal today may be legal tomorrow – and vice versa – so go ahead and hang your hat on that one. Besides, say the wrong thing in the wrong forum and you waive your right to privacy!
If this sounds like a stern lecture to the younger crowd, I assure you, it’s not (although of course by any measure, the younger crowd makes the most use of social networking by far). But here’s the problem. The younger crowd becomes the older crowd someday (yours truly is still young at heart). You are making mistakes you can’t undo – not even with the ‘delete’ key.
This isn’t an argument about past mistakes or even present ones. This is about the future. Whether you ask yourself how an off-hand remark today can somehow be relevant five years later isn’t the point. You don’t know what you’ll be doing five years from now, anyway. But trust me, it will be relevant and the judge isn’t going to care that, “well, I was young and drunk at the time”. That’s not exactly a sterling character reference.
There are a plethora of articles about the perils of social networking in relation to background checks, jobs, etc. That’s not my area of purview. You may not just be screwing yourselves. You may be screwing your 
employers, and whenever those two worlds collide, it opens up a slew of legal, ethical and privacy arguments – and you will lose many of those arguments.
Social networking has the potential to be like that tattoo you regret getting when you were
drunk last night or the morning after, when you wake up and can’t
recall what you did the night before…
For your sake, I hope it wasn’t spent sitting between the mouse and the chair…
e-Discovery California: AB 5: Consent Calendar – 2nd Day
AB 5 has been placed on the Consent Calendar – 2nd Day. The explanation, from my March 6th, 2009 post:
After their second reading, these uncontested bills are placed on the “Consent Calendar–First Legislative Day” for one day, and are then placed upon the “Consent Calendar–Second Legislative Day,” at which point they become eligible for passage. Bills listed on the second-day consent calendar are voted on without debate with one roll-call vote.
We’re getting closer, folks…and they’d better hurry, because I’m running out of “good luck” images…
e-Discovery LOL: Still Think You Control Your ESI?
I wanted to illustrate a point about the complete lack of privacy and/or control inherent with social networking sites like Twitter, Facebook and MySpace. My friend, Simon Taylor is an artist. I asked him to go out on the ‘net, find information about me, then have his way with it.
Simon went to my law school site and procured this photo of my swearing in to the Bar (the gentleman on the left is John F. Gilligan, my law school mentor. Yours truly is the strapping young chap on the right):
Now take a look at the photo after Mr. Taylor got through with it…
e-Discovery California: AB 5: Legislative Procedure Explained
I’m coming clean. I’m a political junkie. I love all things politics. A favorite blog of mine is FiveThirtyEight.com. If you’re a lawyer, there’s a high probability that you have a background in Political Science (although I confess, I don’t, except by hobby). I thought it might be interesting to post the in-depth explanation of California Legislative Procedure (warning: the link opens a 36-page PDF file) as AB 5 continues to make its way through the process (there was a little more action – you’ll find the explanation on page 8 of the document under ‘Consent Calendar’). Also, I’ve added it as a link to the top right of the button bar and I’ll probably keep it there until this ‘horse race’ concludes.
A little light reading for your Friday…