A blind woman is suing after being removed from jury duty. She’s arguing it’s unfair, but many are debating if her dismissal was justifiable given the nature of some evidence in cases. What do you think?
I respect her drive to serve on a jury, considering many avoid it, but some trials need jurors to look at pictures or videos. It could become a huge problem if she serves and the defendant claims on appeal that she couldn’t fairly review visual evidence. Even if other jurors explained it to her, it wouldn’t be the same as seeing it herself.
@Reagan
Yeah, that’s a tricky situation. No easy answers to this one.
Lane said:
@Reagan
Yeah, that’s a tricky situation. No easy answers to this one.
Well, they do say justice is blind, right?
Lane said:
@Reagan
Yeah, that’s a tricky situation. No easy answers to this one.
I can’t downvote this enough. There’s definitely a right answer here.
@Reagan
I don’t get why this is even controversial. A defendant’s right to a jury that can examine all the evidence should outweigh her wish to be on the jury. The court wouldn’t exclude someone without a solid reason.
@Reagan
If the whole system is not accessible, that’s a problem in itself. If any other minority group were intentionally kept out of juries, people would be raising serious questions. If disabled people are left out because of their disabilities, it’s still a fairness issue for defendants who are also disabled.
@Dru
The purpose of a jury is for each member to decide the facts for themselves. If someone can’t see, they can’t review visual evidence independently. That’s a basic requirement, not discrimination. You can’t be a firefighter if you’re in a wheelchair, and you can’t be a juror if you can’t review all evidence.
@Dru
That’s just based on emotions. Look up the ADA guidelines and you’ll see why this needs more thought.
@Dru
This isn’t discrimination. As someone who is hard of hearing, I know there are jobs I can’t do, and that’s okay. Some jobs have physical requirements, and jury duty isn’t a right—it’s a responsibility. If someone’s presence on the jury affects the fairness of the trial, that matters more.
It’s hard to judge this without knowing more about the trial. A lot of cases today have photos or videos. And while people can describe videos, they might add their own bias unintentionally. There’s also some research that suggests blind people can be better at picking up on lies in testimony, but that’s not fully proven. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys may have a reason to want jurors who can see facial expressions and body language.
@Chin
Actually, focusing on faces isn’t the best way to spot lies. People are usually more reliable at catching lies based on words and inconsistencies. Body language can be misleading because nervousness can look like guilt. There are signs to watch for, but they’re more about deviations from someone’s normal behavior. For example, think of Marjorie Taylor Greene during the insurrection questioning—she seemed uneasy only during certain parts. Or Herschel Walker talking about past abuse—he got vague when questioned directly. Most people aren’t trained to accurately read body language anyway.
@Gentry
I get that. But in some cases, you might have obvious visual tells, like someone looking at their lawyer for help when they should remember the answer themselves. Or they might just freeze up. In those situations, it would be tough for a blind juror to catch those signs. If it came down to a single juror seeing something obvious and not being able to explain it well enough, both the defense and prosecution might feel the trial wasn’t fair.
If she’s blind, any interpretation of a photo would just be someone else’s take on it, not her own.
People with disabilities should get reasonable accommodations, but I don’t think describing pictures and videos counts as reasonable. Take the Telles case as an example. His defense relied on arguments like ‘that side profile isn’t me’—how would a blind person make their own call on that? It doesn’t mean they can’t ever be on a jury, but for cases relying heavily on visuals, it’s not practical.
@Nico
If someone needs it explained why having others interpret videos and photos for a blind juror is a problem, maybe they shouldn’t be serving on juries either. People’s lives are on the line here.
I’ve been a civil rights lawyer for over 30 years, and I don’t see this case going far. In criminal trials, the defendant’s right to an impartial jury will likely come up as an appeal issue. It might be different for a blind juror with some vision and assistive tools, but fully blind jurors might face an uphill battle in these situations.