I have old Facebook and Twitter accounts, maybe some others. I’m old so there’s a MySpace account out there. But I’ve mostly been using reddit the last decade or so, and have migrated to Lemmy. Now, Lemmy is the only social media i use. Recent news got me thinking about this question.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Legally, wouldn’t you have to?

    When you’re answering the questionnaire, you’re already sworn-in and under oath, so I would assume you’d legally have to. Not sure what the penalty would be, though, but I’m not really interested in finding out.

    I guess they’d also have to prove it’s yours, though. Still, even though I use a pseudo-anonymous name online, I don’t post anything I wouldn’t want my real name next to.

    Edit: OTOH, you could probably refuse to answer which would likely get you dismissed. IANAL, though. The last time I was summoned for jury duty, they didn’t ask about social media accounts or anything like that. Just a few questions that would have indicated whether I could be impartial.

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      From the thread comments, I believe OP is asking about giving up social media between the summons and the selection as a means to more likely end up on a jury.

      Attorneys might ask about past social media use and you are supposed to tell the truth. I don’t feel comfortable with people scrubbing their social media history and then lying to the court about what may or may not have been on it, which is the undertone I’m getting in the thread.

      In a higher profile case, bigger and more expensive attorney teams will probably spend more time and effort to snoop on prospective jurors, on lower profile cases attorneys will probably just ask jurors questions and look at their answer forms.