Direct Communication with Jurors
Perhaps the thing that's most likely to torpedo your case in the middle of trial is unauthorized communication with members of the jury. Again, this is a basic lesson that sometimes just doesn't register. The recent reversal of a life sentence for a recidivist burglar in the case of Caliendo v. Warden illustrates the problem.
In 1892, the U.S. Supreme Court cautioned witnesses against talking to jurors while a case is on trial. "Private communications, possibly prejudicial, between jurors and third persons, or witnesses, or the officer in charge, are absolutely forbidden, and invalidate the verdict, at least unless their harmlessness is made to appear." (Mattox v. U.S.)
This ancient case was cited in 2004 by the federal appeals court in Caliendo because the investigating officer had talked to three jurors for about twenty minutes during a recess. Even though these discussions (about baseball, exercise, and the officer's workload) did not relate to the case, the court held that the extended conversation might have caused the jurors to place greater credence in the officer's testimony than they otherwise would have. Since the prosecution did not show that no prejudice resulted, the conviction and life sentence were set aside.
Obviously, it is not possible to avoid all contact with jurors. The Caliendo decision acknowledged that "certain chance contacts between witnesses and jury members-while passing in the hall or crowded together in an elevator-may be inevitable." No presumption of prejudice arises from "de minimus communication," such as greetings or giving directions.