California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bolter, 227 Cal.App.3d 653, 278 Cal.Rptr. 123 (Cal. App. 1991):
People v. Hendricks, supra, 43 Cal.3d 584, 238 Cal.Rptr. 66, 737 P.2d 1350 expressed two reasons for this rule. "First, in cases in which the jury renders a complete verdict, the rule is designed to protect the verdict as an operative fact.... ' "... The office of a juror is discharged upon the acceptance of his verdict by the court." ' [Citation.] [p] Second, in all cases--and therefore fundamentally--the rule is designed to guarantee a fair trial, controlled by the court and shielded from outside influences.... '... Once freed, the jurors can properly discuss the case with the district attorney and the People's witnesses, they can read about it in the media and they can entertain "facts" or opinions about it from any source....' " (Id. at p. 597, 238 Cal.Rptr. 66, 737 P.2d 1350, italics added.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.