General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If a juror feels he or she made the right decison, why hide? [View all]Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I forget what the incidence of serious mental disturbance is. Pretty high in organized sports apparently, but in the general population it is much lower. Numbers are usually between 1-3%.
In any case, when you have millions of people, you are always going to have a significant number who are somewhat mentally confused. When you have an emotionally distraught situation such as this, the possibility of at least getting death threats is pretty high, and in the case of the seriously deluded, they may not just be threats. I assume that the jurors DO feel that they reached the appropriate decision under the law as they were instructed. That does not mean they want to be the target of media harassment, threats and other intrusions upon their private lives.
Mind you, that would almost certainly be the case if they had convicted Zimmerman also. Huge numbers of people seem to have decided one way or another before the trial even started.
So if the jury in these situations does not have the right to remain anonymous, these people's lives would be deeply disturbed regardless of what verdict they had reached. Being called to serve on a jury should not become a sentence of years of disruption.
Jurors are private citizens called by the state to serve a public function, but they should have the option to remain private citizens. And even if you feel passionately that these people should become the personal targets of public sentiment, what about their other family members? Do you think their children should be exposed to that?