Opinion ID: 2635626
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Procedural Assurances

Text: ¶ 38 Courts routinely assure prospective jurors through a variety of methods that their private information need not be disclosed to the public. Among these methods are the general court rules, Washington courts' juror guide, and juror questionnaires. ¶ 39 General Rule (GR) 31 is a procedural tool that facilitates juror privacy. This court rule states that [i]ndividual juror information, other than name, is presumed to be private, and the rule also sets forth procedures for gaining juror information upon showing of good cause. GR 31(j). We adopted GR 31(j) in acknowledgment of the importance of juror privacy. Prospective jurors should reasonably expect courts to abide by GR 31 during voir dire. ¶ 40 Additionally, the Washington Courts: A Juror's Guide [2] assures jurors that confidential information may be privately disclosed to the judge. In describing voir dire, the guide explains that jurors may be asked personal questions that must be answered completely and honestly, but the guide assures jurors if [they] are uncomfortable answering [such personal questions], tell the judge and he/she may ask them privately. [3] This guide acknowledges juror privacy interests and assures them that courts provide protective measures to ensure confidentiality. ¶ 41 Further, juror questionnaires give explicit assurances of confidentiality. For example, in this case, counsel submitted a juror questionnaire, which stated: This case involves an allegation of sexual contact by defendant with a minor child. As a result, the court needs you to respond to the following questions ... [y]our answers will be revealed only to the Prosecuting Attorney, the Defendant's Attorney, the Defendant, the Judge, her/his staff and the Clerk, each of whom are under court order to keep the information confidential and under seal.[ [4] ] When jurors respond to the questions, they should reasonably expect courts to be truthful and maintain the confidentiality of extremely sensitive, personal, and perhaps traumatic experiences. ¶ 42 Through the above methods, as well as other means, courts routinely assure jurors that their private information will remain private. The courts' assurances serve at least two purposes: to respect individuals' privacy interests and to guarantee an impartial jury. The trial court's decision in this case to order a temporary closure of a portion of voir dire is consistent with these purposes and furthered the primary goal of Bone-Club's [5] balancing test: to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial.