Cashing in on Jury Duty

The very idea of profiting from one's civic duty has motivated the filing of a bill that would ban jurors from receiving payment within 270 days from serving on a jury. Violation of this ''cooling-off'' period could result in a third-degree felony conviction and carry up to five years in prison and as much as $10,000 in fines. The law would also extend to media groups who attempt to buy information from jurors.

The bill, which was filed by State Representative Scott Randolph of Orlando, has received support from Mark Nejame, the lawyer who previously represented the parents of Casey Anthony. ''Every American must receive a fair trial, without fear that a juror may be influenced by future monetary considerations,'' said Nejame.


This unnamed bill can now be added to the list of measures that have been proposed following Casey Anthony's acquittal in the death of her daughter, Caylee. The fact that Casey Anthony was not held liable for failing to report Caylee's disappearance for a full month sparked the demand for reform. Lawmakers around the nation, including Florida, responded with Caylee's Law proposals, which would require parents, guardians, and caregivers to report a child's disappearance or death within a reasonable amount of time.

Chief Judge Belvin Perry's decision to protect the identities of the 12 jurors involved in the Casey Anthony trial for an undefined amount of time sparked yet more legislation. Like Perry, lawmakers are concerned for jurors safety and peace of mind following a high-profile or controversial trial. Randolph has also announced plans to file the ''Juror Protection Act,'' which would prevent jurors' names from being released to the public following a trial, except in cases where the juror chooses to make their identity known. The Florida Civil Rights Association is also looking for a lawmaker to sponsor a proposal that would require jurors to remain unidentified for a certain amount of time following the end of the trial. The proposal also calls for the criminalization of any person or group who attempts to communicate with a juror who has made it known that they do not want to be contacted.

Randolph plans to introduce the bill prohibiting jurors from profiting from trials in the 2012 legislative session, making it possible for the bill to become law as early as next year. However, some doubt that the bill will make it that far. According to attorney Larry Walters, Randolph's measure is in conflict with First Amendment rights. ''Jurors have a clear First Amendment right to make a profit from their life stories just like anyone else,'' said Walters. He further points out that the proposed law suggests that it is acceptable to violate a jury member's First Amendment rights for 270 days following any trial.

Randolph, however, asserts that the proposed law does not violate any rights. In fact, he says, it serves to produce greater balance.