http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-16108000

A juror’s tweets have caused the murder conviction of a death row inmate to be overturned by a court in the US.

Arkansas Supreme Court judges said it was inappropriate for a juror to have posted his musings online.

They have asked a panel to consider whether jurors’ access to mobile phones should be limited during trials.

The review coincides with a warning from England and Wales’s Lord Chief Justice that the internet threatens the integrity of trials.

The circuit court judge denied a motion for a new trial on the basis that Mr Franco “never tweeted specifics about the case”.

However the state Supreme Court has reversed that decision.

“Because of the very nature of Twitter as an… online social media site, Juror 2’s tweets about the trial were very much public discussions,” wrote Associate Justice Donald Corbin.

“Even if such discussions were one-sided, it is in no way appropriate for a juror to state musings, thoughts or other information about a case in such a public fashion.”

One of Mr Dimas-Martinez’s lawyers said the case was likely to bring in new rules.

“It’s not about your right to tweet or be on Facebook,” Janice Vaughn said.

“It’s about protecting the right of the person who may end up behind bars or end up losing a significant amount of money in a civil case.”

A criminal is not a criminal until after they commit a crime.  After an individual becomes a criminal, that individual sacrifices certain rights (being detained for ex.) and is guaranteed other rights (Miranda rights for ex.) Is privacy one of the rights sacrificed? 

In closer relation to the article; Why would you not follow the rules?  Come on, that was just not appropriate.

Be happy,

3/2