Sometimes jurors get excessively involved in a trial. But playing the puzzle game sudoku during evidence is taking far too little interest, says Auckland law professor Bill Hodge.
Like many others, he has been astounded at the revelations in Sydney where a million-dollar drugs trial has been aborted because jurors were caught playing sudoku.
Sydney District Court Judge Peter Zahra yesterday cut short the trial in which two men faced possible life sentences on drugs conspiracy charges.
The trial had been running for 66 days over the past four months and had cost taxpayers an estimated $A1 million ($NZ1.26 million), AAP reported.
The jury foreperson admitted to the judge that four to five jurors were playing puzzle games for up to half the time the trial had been going. They had photocopied the sudoku sheets and compared their results during the meal breaks.
"I don't recall in New Zealand a case where the jurors demonstrably focused their attention on something else in this way," Associate Professor Hodge told NZPA.
"I guess that's a lesson to us all."
In a book on court procedure, Prof Hodge detailed instances when jurors sometimes took too much interest and conducted internet searches and experiments after hearing evidence.
"They have got excessively involved and that is cause for a mistrial. It's not quite the same as paying no attention to what is going on."
Sudoku-playing violated the rule that jurors decide the case on what they hear on oath in the courtroom subject to cross-examination.
Prof Hodge said it was hard for jurors to concentrate during long trials and he imagined plenty of doodling on notebooks occurred in New Zealand courts - and not just by jurors.
"I think if you saw judges' notebooks you'd see some strange things."
But sudoku goes away beyond that.
"I think sudoku requires incredible concentration. I got caught once in law school playing connect the dots, but that is light relief compared to sudoku.
"Obviously you are meant to be focusing on the evidence and weighing up credibility and listening carefully."
In the Sydney case, a defence lawyer alerted the judge after it was observed the jurors were writing vertically, rather than horizontally. It had been assumed they were taking notes.
"Yes, it helps me keep my mind busy paying more attention," the jury foreman told the judge on Tuesday. "Some of the evidence is rather drawn out and I find it difficult to maintain my attention the whole time, and that doesn't distract me too much from proceedings."
Jurors in the trial are anonymous and no action can be taken against them for the puzzle playing.
"Jurors are sort of the judges of the facts and it's very disappointing they weren't giving our clients a fair trial," said Robyn Hakelis, a lawyer for one of the defendants.
A new trial is expected to begin in a few weeks. - with AP
