It is well known that the media does not favor anonymous juries. They contend that this information should be in the public domain, and that jurors should be held more accountable when their identities are known. But really, what should they be held accountable for? The jury selection process and veil of secrecy surrounding juries during trials have always been a media focal point. Jurors participating in proceedings involving networks of sympathizers (such as terrorist and organized crime) should always be permitted to remain anonymous until the proceedings have been completed.
One argument against anonymous juries is that it gets in the way of the jury interviewing/selection process. If they answer selection questionnaires anonymously, some would argue it creates disparities and jurors can answer the questions dishonestly. But this argument goes both ways since jurors could respond more honestly (because their identities are protected).
Either way, this is good for citizens that have to participate in controversial trials where they may be in danger of intimidation or retribution. The ability to remain anonymous by sending an anonymous message or conveying information anonymously is critical to the safety of all people.
If you would like to learn more about this story from its original source please click here.
Discover how to send an anonymous email - Go Silent! The Truth Will Set You Free...