"Jury trials cannot be made perfect..."; U.S. Supreme Court to hear arguments about juror statements and motions for a new trial

"On October 8, in Warger v. Shauers, the Court will hear oral arguments on whether, in support of a motion for a new trial, a juror may testify about statements made during deliberations which show that another juror gave misleading answers to questions asked on voir dire."

This is the first paragraph in the link from the U.S. Supreme Justice blog below.

This is another quote from the same post;

"Thus, testimony about statements during deliberations that show a juror’s irrationality, preconceptions, or misunderstanding of the law is banned. Jury trial cannot be made perfect, and the rule’s drafters opted to protect jurors from embarrassment and preserve the stability of verdicts."

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/09/argument-preview-justices-to-resolve-circuit-split-on-juror-testimony-about-deliberations/

Private defense attorney Allan Dollison sent me this link. he further commented on the relevance of the decision in this case and how it may affect the Timothy Littlefield case. A mistrial was declared by Judge John Feeney for the second trial in which Littlefield was found guilty of eight life sentences for charges of child molestation. A third trial is on hold while the DA's office appeals the decision in the second trial.

This is a different case scheduled for US Supreme Court argument. Now from the outset it is interpreting a Federal Rule, so it might not be exactly on point. Most states typically adopt their standards from federal decisions or rules. It appears that the issues that the court will be grappling with are at the heart of the Littlefield case in terms of what is allowed. The rule decidedly prohibits what our Court did."