The attempt to unlawfully influence the outcome of a trial by improperly contacting, bribing, threatening or otherwise pressuring a member of a jury, or by attempting to have an already-decided verdict influenced through improper contact after deliberations have begun. It is treated as a distinct offense from the broader charge of obstruction of justice or witness tampering because it targets a juror specifically, protecting the impartiality of the fact-finding body itself rather than a witness's testimony or an investigation's evidence. Serious cases can result in a mistrial being declared and the underlying case being retried, in addition to separate criminal liability for the person who attempted the tampering.
Facts
Classification CodeUnited Kingdom: the Criminal Justice Act 2003, Part 7, chapter 44, section 44, permits trial without a jury where there is danger of jury tampering or where tampering has taken place; Republic of Ireland: the Special Criminal Court, a three-judge juryless court established under the Constitution of Ireland, hears cases where the ordinary courts are judged inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice. 1 Typical PenaltyNo single statutory penalty range is documented; recorded sentences include nearly four years' imprisonment for Gil Dozier, Louisiana's Commissioner of Agriculture and Forestry, convicted of jury tampering while on bail after his own convictions for extortion and racketeering, and three years' imprisonment for a juror convicted in the 1987 Gotti trial tampering case. 1 Elements of OffenseUnduly attempting to influence the composition or decisions of a jury during the course of a trial, including attempting to discredit prospective jurors to prevent their selection, bribing or intimidating jurors once selected, making unauthorized contact to introduce prohibited outside information and argue for a mistrial, or distributing material about jurors' rights and obligations. 1 Notable ExampleGeorge Pape, a jury foreman in the 1987 trial of John Gotti, sought out Gotti's underlings, who agreed to pay him 75,000 dollars in exchange for a not guilty vote; Pape was later convicted of jury tampering and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. 1 Jurisdiction VariationIn Great Britain the Criminal Justice Act 2003 permits a non-jury trial where jury tampering is a danger; the first such criminal trial was held in 2009 for a Heathrow Airport armed robbery case after three prior juries failed to reach a verdict or were discharged, ending on 31 March 2010 with guilty verdicts for all four defendants. 1 Classification
Offense GradeSerious or Indictable Offense 1 Connections
Has Offense Grade
Entity-backed identity for the offense-grade enum value this offense already carries, resolved to a crime concept by an explicit value-to-entity map (phase 3 bucket conversion, docs\design_entity_backed_browse_buckets_20260928.md). The offense-grade fact itself stays on the offense unchanged.
Sources
1. Jury Tampering (Wikipedia)
WikipediaExternal links, Criminal Justice Act citation
Criminal Justice Act 2003. Chapter 44, Part 7. Trials on indictment without a jury
Lead section, definition sentence
Jury tampering is the crime of unduly attempting to influence the composition or decisions of a jury during the course of a trial.
Cases section, Dozier paragraph
Gil Dozier, Louisiana Commissioner of Agriculture and Forestry, was charged with jury tampering while on bail and after being convicted of five felonies, including extortion and racketeering. He served nearly four years in prison.
Cases section, Pape paragraph
George Pape, a jury foreman in a 1987 trial of John Gotti, sought out Gotti's underlings, who agreed to pay him $75,000 in exchange for a not guilty vote. Pape was later convicted of jury tampering and sentenced to three years imprisonment.
United Kingdom section, 2009 ruling sentence
On 18 June 2009, the Court of Appeal in England and Wales made a landmark ruling that resulted in the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, allowing the first-ever criminal trial to be held without a jury by invoking Section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
View the Source Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.