Do you think former jurors on big court cases should be prevented from selling their stories for a profit?

How would you prevent it? and why?

I guess as a general rule I don’t think things should be regulated unless there’s someone who is harmed by it directly.

If someone will pay for their point of view and opinions, it’s completely theirs to give.

Probably there is nothing that can stop this person from writing it.
It would be justice if no one bought the book (if it was written purely to make big bucks, which it has a smell of to me).

Yes, I think people on a jury should not profit from their book deals because it makes people try to get onto juries on purpose, just so that they can profit, later on down the line. I would think it would be pretty easy to lie to get yourself onto a jury. It’s actually harder to get yourself off of a jury, if you don’t want to be there.

But I think it’s perfectly OK for jurors to tell their stories, and hope that they would, so that we can get a better idea of what went on in the court room and in their own minds, as to why they voted one way or the other. But they shouldn’t profit from their stories.

If things are to be totally fair, if the convicted cannot be paid or the story neither should the prosecution, anyone in the court or the jury.

No.

I love this.
People are screaming about how stupid the jury was. How could they let her off???
Now, those same people are saying that they should be prevented from explaining.