Definition
An administration-of-justice offense involving interference with lawful processes, truthful fact-finding, custody, or court authority. It requires proof of the interfering act and the intent element specified by the offense definition. It does not include lawful advocacy or conduct lacking the required intent and process-nexus elements. It protects adjudicative integrity and can substantially increase exposure to sanctions and detention outcomes. The concept is generally stable, though procedural triggers and penalties evolve over time.
Principle
Principle
The integrity and independence of jurors are essential to fair trials; external contacts or coercive actions that distort juror impartiality are prohibited.
Demonstration
Demonstration
A defendant's associate approaches a juror outside court offering money for a not-guilty verdict; a third party sends threatening messages to jurors during deliberations to force a quick decision.
Misapplication
Misapplication
Equating routine media coverage or lawful public commentary about a case with tampering, absent targeted, directed attempts to influence specific jurors.
Consequence
Consequence
Successful or attempted jury tampering can invalidate verdicts, result in mistrials, cause criminal charges against the perpetrator, and necessitate protective measures for jurors.
Reversal
Reversal
Strict courtroom controls, sequestering, juror anonymity in high-risk cases, and sanctions for misconduct that together preserve impartial deliberation.
Boundary
Boundary
Covers direct or indirect acts aimed at individual jurors or the jury's decision-making; does not include lawful, general public discourse about a case or criticisms of the system that are not targeted at jurors.
Semantic Tension
Semantic Tension
Tension arises between free speech and protecting juror impartiality: broad public debate can be legitimate while targeted approaches to individual jurors are unlawful.
Synthesis
Synthesis
Jury Tampering is the prohibited targeting of jurors to influence verdicts or deliberations; protecting juror independence requires both preventive safeguards and remedies when interference occurs.