As pandemic restrictions start to ease up across the country, it is a good time to evaluate the way courts handled trials during the pandemic, and what we can learn from that going forward. While many trials were postponed, a small number of venues (particularly at the state and local level) took the bold step of conducting virtual trials on civil matters during the pandemic. This experiment with virtual trials may feel like a temporary solution to what was a temporary problem. But should it be?
One of the greatest concerns that attorneys, judges, and legal scholars have expressed in transitioning from in-person to virtual or remote trials is that this new medium will undermine our ability to adequately assess jurors during voir dire. More specifically, will virtual voir dire make it harder to evaluate the veracity of prospective jurors’ responses as well as their demeanor and body language? For these same reasons, there has been concern over evaluating witness credibility in remote settings or when witnesses testify in-person but are required to wear masks.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
