Murder verdict overturned because of 7000 texts by a juror during the trial!

01 November 2019 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

The New York Times reported that in 2015 “a jury convicted Robert Neulander, a prominent doctor in central New York, of killing his wife...[and] that one of the jurors who had voted to convict him of murder had exchanged 7,000 text messages with family and friends during the three-week trial.”  The October 31, 2019 article entitled “After Juror Exchanged 7,000 Texts, Murder Verdict Is Overturned” included these comments:

Hundreds of the texts involved aspects of the case, a clear violation of the judge’s standard admonition that jurors not discuss the matter until after the trial was over.

On Oct. 22, the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, affirmed an appeals court’s decision last year that the conduct by the juror, Johnna Lorraine, was so bad that the conviction of Mr. Neulander, 68, should be set aside and that he should get a new trial.

In another potential violation of the judge’s instructions, Ms. Lorraine, a 23-year-old cheerleading coach at the time of the trial, also visited the websites of news organizations that were closely covering the case, according to court documents.

One notable aspect of that ruling: The Court of Appeals found that Ms. Lorraine had committed “misconduct, deceit and destruction of evidence,” depriving Mr. Neulander of his right to a fair trial. But it, too, did not find that she had been biased in reaching a verdict.

This seems like the right result!

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.