Achieving fair and impartial results in the American judicial system is heavily dependent – perhaps principally dependent – on the collective wisdom of the jury. The environment provided by the jury deliberation room is an essential factor in supporting (or not supporting) the jury’s ability to function properly in the courtroom planning process. This article considers the ideal jury deliberation room environment and examines several examples that are less than ideal.
I have emphasized the important role played by the jury in several of my past articles relating to courthouse jury facilities. From jury assembly rooms to courtroom jury boxes, I have described how the citizens who serve on a jury can be most effectively supported in performing this highly critical function.
We might think of jury duty as being comprised of three sequential steps:
The jury deliberation room is where the “rubber meets the road.” Jury deliberation is the third and final step in the juror’s journey and is as important as the assembly room and courtroom environments.
Interestingly, the jury deliberation room is a dichotomy of functions. On the one hand, it is a place that must support and encourage the intense consideration of the facts in a case. A “think tank.” But on the other hand, it is a place that must accommodate a jury being sequestered for days or weeks until a verdict is reached. It must be a “safe room” that is sealed off visually, acoustically, and from physical intrusion to maintain the confidentiality of the deliberations.
How are these two functions supported in a single room? Let’s take a look.
To support the ability of the jury members to concentrate on the facts of the case, a jury deliberation room must provide sufficient conveniences that allow the jury to be comfortable and also avoid distractions. It is important that jury members not be required to leave the deliberation room to use toilets or obtain refreshments. For this reason, jury room standards typically require the following components:
The jury deliberation room shown in the following photo impressed me as a particularly complete example of providing conveniences for the jurors.
As a contrast, the following photos of two jury deliberation rooms show unquestionably attractive design solutions. However, they may have missed the mark functionally, according to court personnel.
To maintain the critical confidentiality required of jury deliberations, the room and its support facilities must be isolated visually, acoustically, and from physical intrusion. To this end, jury room standards normally require the following components:
The following photo is an unfortunate example of a potential break in the "safe room” concept.
The following layout plan used in an Iowa courthouse is a good example of a complete jury deliberation room that fully accommodates both the "think tank” and “safe room” functions. Note the use of a round jury room table to represent the equal status of all jury members.
As may be surmised from the "think tank” and “safe room” standards described in this article, unlike the jury assembly area, the requirements associated with a jury deliberation room are too specific to allow other rooms to be used as an alternative. Essentially, jury deliberation rooms perform a very critical and specific function and must be dedicated to this purpose.