Juror stress: The hidden influence of the jury experience

Is our jury system truly archaic, failing to account for the emotional, financial and personal toll of jurors, as relatives of jurors in the Yorgen Fenech trial have described?

Once selected, jurors are temporarily isolated from their families and the outside world. When the trial concludes, it is often difficult for them—particularly after lengthy trials—because upon being released, they naturally wonder: What do we do now?

It is rare for jurors to discuss their experiences, and they are barred by law from talking about what went on in the jury room.

Yet, undoubtedly, the experience of sitting in silence for long periods and the responsibility of sometimes following complex trials can affect them all deeply and leave some of them struggling to adapt to their normal lives. Some might be surprised to find that they miss the experience.

It is a significant responsibility. Someone’s life and well-being may ultimately rest in your hands, and the evidence is rarely straightforward. You recognise the significance of your role, yet you are acutely aware that your understanding and capacity to analyse information are limited. Jurors frequently grapple with the weight of their responsibilities.

I have witnessed all that during all those years I prosecuted in trials by jury, and it became easy for me to intercept and grasp the various sentiments and emotions transmitted by the looks on the jurors’ faces.

They initially come to the courtroom really hating jury duty—from driving to the capital city in rush hour to all that waiting around; from the realisation that law-abiding citizens called for jury duty have fewer rights than alleged criminals to the even bigger realisation that trials are seldom really about guilt or innocence but rather about some minutiae in a subparagraph of a subsection in the Criminal Code. Many rue the fact that they were not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

We often link inactivity with a relaxing vacation, but it can become very stressful when it is forced and cannot be changed. Both waiting for trial and sitting through monotonous evidence can bore jurors.

Being in a courtroom, for what may be the first time, can be a bit intimidating. As long as you understand and trust your own moral judgement, you have the right to be in the courtroom. It is not only your right but also your duty as a citizen to participate in and support the justice system.

We lawyers are great at understanding the connection between trials and stress—our own stress, that is, and that of our clients and witnesses. In our haste to manage our own stress while preparing for trial, we frequently overlook the jury—those silent, expressionless faces—and the considerable stress they endure. It’s important to reflect on this matter and take the necessary time to prepare accordingly.

Most of them don’t let it show in the courtroom, but jurors are stressed. Jurors experience stress from their jury service even during brief trials lasting one to three days. Afterwards, they often feel the need to discuss the distressing parts of their jury duty with others. One of the most concerning aspects is how stress can influence the thought processes of certain jurors, and, even more alarmingly, affect their decision-making.

Those stress levels after short trials, striking as they are, are nothing compared to what jurors can experience after long trials. They will carry disturbing memories of their jury duty, leaving them feeling numb and detached and more tense than before. They will steer clear of anything that reminds them of jury duty, worried that it might trigger a surge of emotions related to their experience, which they likely have suppressed.

Jury service can be a significant source of anxiety and, for a vulnerable minority, can engender moderate to severe clinical levels of stress and, in the longer term, lead to symptoms associated with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). The causes of stress are multiple.

On any given day, criminal trials compel jurors to confront images they would much rather avoid, ranging from typical murder and sexual offence cases to the more horrific accounts of serial murder and torture. Disturbing evidence has the proven effect of causing sleep disturbances, intrusive thoughts, restlessness and agitation. Stress-related symptoms include depression, sexual problems, headaches, eating disorders and somatic complaints.

Disturbing evidence is even more disturbing to someone who has personal experience with it, and even evidence that would be fairly easy for most people to handle can be traumatic to someone whose personal history puts it in a different perspective. From unexplained rules and delays to unintelligible jury instructions, jurors don’t know what’s going on. Just think of your first visit to a foreign airport for a quick reminder of how stressful this is.

There follow economic and job concerns. Missing work has always been stressful, especially for jurors who are self-employed or paid by the hour. In the current economic climate, that stress is intensified.

Juror support does not find itself too often on the media radar. But this is an issue likely to return repeatedly, especially in our increasingly trauma-informed world, and certainly until the nature of the duty of care owed by the state to the juror is more fully addressed.