If there is a jury trial and an objection is sustained how do people on the jury dismiss what was said? Can one put that comment aside?
In: 1
The judge will instruct the jury to disregard it in the moment. He or she will also issue jury instructions before they go to deliberate, and may remind them at that point what they are and are not to consider when reaching a verdict.
But… jurors are people and don’t always follow instructions. The judges do the best they can and jurors generally decide who they believe then pick the facts that fit the outcome they believe is just.
First off, the whole objection thing you see in court is played up on TV for drama, but not that common in actual court cases. But an objection is typically upon the question asked by the attorney, not an answer/testimony. And yes, when you are deliberating, it’s like showing work on a math problem. There is are guidelines to consider, questions to ask and answer in a series of steps to come to a verdict and the specific testimony that IS allowed is used to come to an answer, to then move to the next question.
For example, in a civil case I was on a jury for we had to determine some series like: did the alleged transgression take place, was there actual harm/damages, was the defendant at fault, was the defendant negligent/malicious intent, etc. Or something along those lines. There were 5 questions we needed to answer/prove before ruling. We sort of “showed our work” to prove each step based on evidence/testimony before answering the next one. If there were things we were told to ignore, we didn’t use them as proof, but stuck to things we were able to consider.
This is up to the judge to evaluate. The judge may instruct the jury to disregard the statement if they think that the jury is able to do so, or at least that it will not have any significant impact on their decision. The alternative is to abort the trial and get a new jury. This is sometimes done if the judge do not think the jury can disregard the statements. But of course this is very invasive as the trial will have to be started all over.
[removed]
Jurors are allowed notepads (they do not leave the courtroom or bailiff’s possession until deliberation and are then destroyed, at least in my experience.) If an objection is sustained, it helps to cross out whatever you were writing down to help remember to disregard it during deliberation.
Another thing I want to point out that I haven’t seen mentioned. When there’s an objection that’s been sustained, something that always happens but you don’t see in the courtroom dramas is that the lawyer who objected will then immediately ask that the part objected to be stricken from the record.
The reason for this being that whole jurors could remember some things, and might take notes on general things, they will fall back on and use the court record while deliberating to actually remember the specific questions and answers given. So if there was something asked or said which had a sustained objection, it won’t be there when they do that.
Now as others have also said, depending on the gravity of the objection, as the saying goes, “you can’t unring a bell” and the judge may be forced to take other actions beyond instructing the jury to disregard those comments.
As the saying goes: you can’t unring a bell.
A good judge will make it clear to the jury that the evidence should be disregarded, but the jurors are still human, and you can’t unhear something. So it impacts opinions, in fact that’s the point. I’m sure most lawyers know when one of their lines of question or arguments will be objected before they even say it.
Latest Answers