The Observation Deck

Since when are jurors allowed to question witnesses? I've never heard of that before, but it's happening at this trial.

Its been happening over the last few years. It started out in the Federal Courts and is now working its way into the lower courts.

I have been in a couple of trials, one in Federal and one in Common Pleas in Summit County, both were civil cases and its quite intriguing to listen to the questions from the jurors.
It also helps the lawyers figure out what is working and what isn't. Also, you can get a sense from the jurors when they are really ticked off at the lawyers based on the questions.

Wow. I never knew this. This hasn't filtered down to tv dramatizations, though. Never saw a Boston Legal where this happened.

Still, this seems an odd thing. On the one hand, it takes away from the lawyers a bit by asking the questions and directing the witness into areas that a defense or prosecuting attorney might want to avoid (for strategic reasons, no doubt). Can their questions be "objected" to by either attorney as they can object to each other's? One hopes for responsible questions from a jury but since a jury of my peers are potentially morons (don't make me give examples) then I could see some Judge Judy/People's Court wannabes getting in their snarky quips and nonsense. If I were a judge, I would be heartily frightened by this.

There is something a bit gladiatorial yet somehow more fair to expect two teams of lawyers to do their best job to paint both sides of an issue and leave it in the hands of the jury to make up their minds based on that alone. Any lawyers on here willing to chime in on this? I am simply stunned that this happens.

Thanks!

The process is after each side has had a chance to conduct their questioning of the witness, the Judge will ask the jurors to write down their questions and then give them to the Judge.

The Judge will then review them first, then call the Attorneys to a side bar conference and go over the questions with them. The attorneys have the right to object to the questions, the court can than either allow the question, uphold the objection on the question or perhaps reword the question so its not prejudicial.

The witness is then asked the question as it was from the attorneys or the court.

Based on the answer, the attorneys can then ask follow up questions.

The questions from the Jury box can only be related to that witness on the stand, there is no going back to another testimony to get a clarification.

That's really intriguing. I'm glad to know that the judge reviews the questions first. And I'm sure it really does help the attorneys get a feel for what's going through the jurors minds.