Jurors form shared impressions in idle recess chatter long before deliberating

Evidence

The jurors had made such observations casually, passing the time in conversation when the trial had halted for those interminable bench conferences. To Coulsey, John J. Riley had come across “like a creep.” She thought her fellow jurors agreed with her. After Riley’s second day on the witness stand, Henry Jason had whispered loud enough for the others to hear, “Who’s he trying to snow?” Everyone had laughed. “The thing that kills me,” Coulsey later remarked, “was Riley saying he’s turned the fifteen acres into a conservation area.” She thought Drobinski had been an excellent witness, forthright and credible. Facher’s manner toward Drobinski had irritated her. “How can Mr. Facher belittle people like that?” she had wondered. “He’s very sarcastic, but he can pick up on something that isn’t right just like that. God help you if you make a mistake with Mr. Facher.” — , Harr Jonathan - A Civil Action, 2332

Categorization

• SEED: An essay on the hidden jury work done during bench conferences — how coterie storytelling inside a jury box shapes verdicts more than evidence does.
• XREF: connects to: Trial preparation treats jurors as an audience to be persuaded through staged presentation — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 850