CBA Record July-August 2018

tion of due process, the Jury Commission in Lake County creates a form given to the parties in the court called a Juror Back- ground Form. Other counties across the nation have also made no-name juries a permanent staple in their court system. For example, Fairfield County in Ohio empanels all grand jury and trial jury lists anonymously. Under the rule, jurors’ names, addresses, and phone numbers remain anonymous to all, including the court. State v. Hill , 92 Ohio St. 3d 191, 195 (2001). California has also implemented an anonymous jury system to protect jurors’ privacy, safety and well-being, along with public confidence in and willingness to participate in the jury system. Keleher, The Repercussions of Anonymous Juries , 44 U.S.F. L. Rev. at 542 Jurors’ privacy and safety concerns Abundant empirical evidence supports the theory that jurors’ stress can affect their duties. In a report by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), entitled “A Study of Stress from High Profile Trials among Jurors and Court Staff,” State of North Dakota, a survey was conducted regarding the stresses post-trial with spe- cific concerns and distinct fears of jurors. Carolyn F. Wolf, The Trial Experience: Civic Service vs. Civil Service , National Center for State Courts, 2011. In the survey, 34% of jurors affirmed that they thought stress had an effect on the thinking of some jurors. Likewise, jurors were asked if stress had an effect on the decisions of some jurors in which 37% stated, “Yes.” A survey con- ducted by the Institute for Court Manage- ment (ICM) with the Snohomish County Superior Court in the state of Washington found 16.4% of jurors worried at least a little bit about community reactions. The ICM concluded that this stress level, in part caused by jurors’ fears of their identity leaking into the community, is enough to impair juror performance and affects the defendant’s right to a fair trial. In Glamour magazine, a 1995 survey of 1,059 female readers of the magazine revealed that 84% advocated for the unconditional use of anonymous juries, with an additional 11% wanting them to be used, but only in cer- tain cases. Nancy J. King, Nameless Justice:

were family members of celebrity Jen- nifer Hudson. Through judicial order, all names of the jurors were not to be released until after the verdict. During jury selec- tion, using the information provided on the juror cards, Judge Burns compiled a spreadsheet containing the jurors’ name, randomly assigned number, and town in which each juror resided. To circumvent any violation of due process, the attorneys for both parties received that spreadsheet, but the jurors were referred to by number from jury selection through post-verdict polling. While this practice may be referred to as an “anonymous” jury, in reality-it is a “no-name” jury. Post-trial, the cards were inventoried and remained under seal with the jury commissioner. The main reason for this empanelment was to ensure that reporters and the public did not contact jurors during the trial, and to alleviate juror concern about safety and privacy. The court’s goal was to ensure that no outside influence affected the jury’s abil- ity to absorb the evidence and render an impartial verdict. After the success of the no-name jury in the Balfour trial, Judge Burns contin- ued to implement the same protocol for all his subsequent jury trials. Prospective jurors are told that this selection process is routine and has been utilized for several years, which assures the jurors, as well as reviewing courts, that there is no particular reason that the names are not publicized.

For more than four years, Judge Burns has collected feedback and data from actual jurors who have been asked to complete a short anonymous survey at the conclusion of their jury service. In the questionnaire, approximately 1,051 jurors were asked to respond anonymously to open-ended questions regarding their experiences during the trial process. The survey asked: “Any other comments about the trial,” and “Please share any comments about your jury experience.” The survey also asked the jurors about their experience and included questions about social-media use during trial. The results that followed were not scientific, nor were they intended to be. Nevertheless, the results were instructive in navigating issues regarding social-media and formed one of the largest collections of comments from actual jurors about social media, their privacy, and their personal concerns that may have affected the trial process. See , Hon. Amy J. St. Eve, Hon. Charles P. Burns, & Michael A. Zucker- man, More from the #Jury Box: the Latest on Juries and Social Media , Duke Law & Technology ReviewDuke Law&Technol- ogy Review, 12 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 64 (2014). Similarly, Lake County, a collar county of Cook County, has empaneled no-name juries in the criminal division of its court system since 1983. The courts keep the anonymity of the jurors by referring to them by number. To circumvent any viola-

36  