WPI 6.20 Completion of Trial—Jurors' Discussion of Case

Use this instruction when thanking jurors for their service after a verdict has been rendered or the trial has otherwise been completed. The instruction may be modified as each judge sees fit.

Background. The Washington State Jury Commission has recommended that the court, before dismissing jurors from service on a trial, should inform jurors of their rights to discuss or refrain from discussing the case. Washington State Jury Commission's Report to the Board for Judicial Administration (July 2000) (Recommendation 20). The Jury Commission also recommends that jurors “should be cautioned about the privacy interests of their fellow jurors and should be reminded not to disclose identifying information about other jurors.” Washington State Jury Commission's Report, Recommendation 20 (narrative section). See GR 31(j) (creating a presumption of privacy for individual juror information other than name).

Judge meeting with jurors after trial. The Jury Commission's report also encourages judges to meet with jurors in an informal setting after the trial is completed. Washington State Jury Commission's Report, Recommendation 17 (narrative section). These debriefing meetings can help relieve juror stress and can give judges valuable feedback as to jurors' perspectives on courtroom procedures.

The judge must exercise caution during any such debriefing session. The judge should advise the jurors at the outset that, even though they may discuss the case with others as they see fit, during the debriefing session with the judge they should not discuss or comment on the way they arrived at their verdict or anything they said during deliberations. See generally Kelley, Addressing Juror Stress: A Trial Judge's Perspective, 43 Drake L.Rev. 97, 116–22 (1994) (discussing the value of, and recommending procedures for, post-trial debriefing sessions between the judge and jurors).

The judge must not commend or criticize jurors for their verdict, but may thank them for their service. See Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 2.8. The judge must retain an impartial demeanor during these sessions, and must refrain from expressing personal opinions about the evidence, the law, or the participants involved in the trial. See generally CJC Canons 1.2 (on avoiding the appearance of impropriety) and 2.2 (on performing judicial duties impartially). Judges may not use these conferences to inquire into the factual basis for the jury's decision, to furnish the basis for a new trial, or to cause the jury to alter its verdict. See Fitzell v. Rama Indus., Inc., 416 So.2d 1246 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App.1982).

During the debriefing session, the judge may wish to elaborate on the instruction that the jurors are free to choose whether to discuss the case or their deliberations with others. The judge may remind them that some jurors may have made comments during the deliberations with the expectation that the comments remain confidential.