16 per cent of jurors believe they cannot use internet at all during trials
Report reveals level of misunderstanding about contempt rules
A significant minority of jurors, 16 per cent, believe they cannot use the internet at all during trials, even to check their own emails, a report has found.
The research, by Professor Cheryl Thomas at the UCL Faculty of Laws, revealed that almost a quarter currently misunderstand the contempt rules in relation to internet use.
Five per cent of jurors believed there was no restriction at all on their use of the internet during a trial, while two per cent thought they could look for information about their case.
The research is understood to provide the first empirical evidence of juror understanding of the rules of contempt in England and Wales.
Almost 82 per cent of jurors said they would have liked more information on how to conduct their deliberations, particularly if they were confused about a legal issue or something went wrong during discussions.
All of them, 100 per cent, said they found the written directions they received helpful. Only a very small number of jurors used the internet in a way which could prove problematic.
One per cent visited the crime scene on Streetview or similar sites, or looked up information about parties to the case.
"These findings show that the vast majority of jurors understand and follow the rules on how jurors can use new media during trial, but the message is not getting through and is confusing to a significant minority," professor Thomas said.
"Ensuring that trial by jury can effectively operate in the new media age requires empirical evidence about what jurors do, what they think and what are the best tools to provide them with to do their job to the best of their ability.
"Contrary to popular belief this kind of research can legally be conducted with real juries in this country, and that is precisely what the UCL Jury Project is doing."
The research was carried out with Crown Court juries this year and last year, and builds on previous work by the UCL Jury Project. It was carried out with the co-operation of the judiciary and the MoJ, and first published in the Criminal Law Review.