A JUROR who looked up a witness on Facebook despite being ordered not to trawl social media has narrowly avoided prison for contempt of court.
Elisabeth Howden, 49, also held up proceedings after claiming one of the accused was looking at her in a "funny" way.
Howden had been selected to serve on a jury at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court.
Before being sworn in, the jurors were forbidden from discussing the case with anyone else and warned not to make their own inquiries - particularly online - as evidence unfolded.
But Howden - who has previously served on a jury - thought she knew the sister of a witness so went home and researched the family on Facebook.
She then returned to court and passed a message to Sheriff Elizabeth McFarlane, explaining what she had done and adding one of the accused had been "looking at me funny".
Sheriff McFarlane removed Howden from the jury and advised her to seek legal representation for potential contempt of court.
Returning to take the place of the accused in the dock, former Morrisons supermarket worker Howden, of Kilwinning, Ayrshire, escaped custody with a £500 fine.
David McSorley, defending, said his client was "extremely worried and frightened" and was well aware of the seriousness of the situation.
Mr McSorley added: "She has, I understand, previously served on a jury without any difficulties two years ago."
Sheriff McFarlane told Howden: "Jury duty is an extremely serious and important civic duty and the administration of justice in this court and other across the country depends on the conduct of jurors.
"You were instructed not to make inquiries or carry out any investigations of your own, and I particularly mentioned Facebook."
Sheriff McFarlane said the instruction was an order, not a request, and she was holding Howden in contempt of court for the "flagrant" breach.
She added: "I have to send out a strong message to potential jurors in this jurisdiction that the courts will not tolerate contempt.
"I'm going to step back from sentencing you to a period of imprisonment but I have to tell you that was foremost in my mind."
The trial continues with 14 jurors.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article