Roger Clemens Trial - Jurors Question Witnesses

Jurors in Roger Clemens' perjury case submitted 29 questions that they want to ask the prosecution's chief witness, Brian McNamee. Among the questions: "Why should we believe you when you have shown so many inconsistencies with your testimonies?" U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton will now have to decide which questions he will allow.

The Federal Rules of Evidence do not explicitly allow or forbid jurors from submitting questions to the court. Rule 611(a) Federal courts have interpreted this rule to leave to the discretion of the trial judge whether to allow questions from jurors. See, e.g. DeBenedetto v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 754 F.2d 512, 515 (4th Cir. 1985). Why does the practice remain so rare?

The advantages of allowing jurors to submit questions are apparent. It helps jurors get a fuller comprehension of the facts, gives them the opportunity to clarify testimony, and engages them in a process to which they are a critical and vital part. Frankly, it can resolve problems with lawyers asking bad questions! Certainly, the practice should keep more jurors attentive and awake during trial. Although, that has not worked in the Clemens trial as the jurors continue to snooze and yawn during testimony. At the end of the day, say proponents, juror questions during trial leads to more fully reasoned and just verdicts.

On the other hand, allowing jurors to ask witnesses questions, promotes jurors to act as advocates not fact finders. Jurors may place too much weight on their own questions, ignore the evidence and simply confirm their preconceived notions. Jurors may...