City, News

Massachusetts Supreme Court rules jurors’ names public record

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled Tuesday that all jurors’ names are to be included in public records prior to or at the conclusion of a trial.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled Tuesday that names of jurors are public record. PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled Tuesday that names of jurors are public record. PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

The decision came down in an appeal from the 2014 case Commonwealth v. Nathaniel Fujita, in which Fujita was brought up on charges of murder in the first degree and assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon. The Boston Globe filed a postverdict motion to obtain the names and addresses of jurors, according to the official decision.

The decision said, “All jurors summoned to jury service each month in every court, containing the ‘name, address and date of birth of each juror,’ are public records ‘available upon request for inspection by parties, counsel, their agents and members of the public.’”

Tracey Maclin, a professor at Boston University School of Law, said he does not believe the release of jurors’ information will affect the way decisions are made in the courtroom.

“There are certainly some cases in which because of concerns about juror safety, they may withhold the names of the jurors during the trial, but that’s not the way it has to be,” he said. “That’s more of the exception of the rule. The rule being things that go on in federal court are available to the public. I am not surprised.”

The panel of justices sitting on the case emphasized that under federal jurisprudence, the public has a right to court and juror empanelment proceedings, a right that the justices wrote has been recognized in Massachusetts as well.

“For the reasons more fully set forth herein, we conclude that the public’s long-term interest in maintaining an open judicial process, as embodied in the United States Constitution and Massachusetts common law, requires that a list identifying the names of jurors who have been empanelled and rendered a verdict in a criminal case be retained in the court file of the case and be made available to the public in the same manner as other court records,” the 22-page verdict stated.

David Rossman, also a professor in the BU School of Law, said this information should be part of protocol for court cases.

“Defendants and their lawyers get information in jury selection that reveals the jurors’ names and address, so having the same information available to the public after the trial should have little effect,” he said in an email. “There is a 1st Amendment right for the public to have access to all trial proceedings, unless there are very weighty countervailing considerations.”

Several residents said they were concerned about safety upon hearing about the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling.

Emily Wipper, 32, of Fenway, said releasing the jurors’ personal information is unsafe for them and their families.

“That sounds really unsafe. Publishing the names sounds unsafe for the families of the jurors. You could find their addresses, phone numbers or employers,” she said. “I just wouldn’t want folks to know my name and where I live.”

Genesis Martinez, 20, of Brighton, said putting a juror’s name in the public record could put them in harm’s way.

“What is going to motivate them to go sit for a jury’s case, because now for a case they have nothing to do with, no involvement in, now they have to risk their lives?” she said. “Because of the person who may be getting tried, you never know. Now you’ve just put yourself at risk.”

Jerome Jarrett, 25, of Brighton, said personal safety is always a primary concern for residents.

“I feel like the whole point of the jurors’ names being anonymous was to protect them,” he said. “If the person being tried comes out to be a mass murderer or someone crazy, it might intimidate the jury. And now if they are intimidated by the circumstances, how do you really know if what they are saying is just at that point or if they are just trying to protect themselves?”

More Articles

Comments are closed.