Jury News Editorial
If upgrades to jury technology are the chief focus in your jury improvement efforts, then new technologies, such as web-based technologies, will provide a contemporary solution.
Quoting Paula Hannaford-Agor, Principal Court Research Consultant and the world's foremost jury expert from the NCSC: "Although web-based technology is ubiquitous in most areas of contemporary life, most courts have not embraced it for jury management purposes".
Why?
Don't these new web-based offerings propose tremendous improvements in the speed and ease of communication?
Don't these new web-based offerings provide juror orientation and organization to both the court and the prospective juror?
According to Paula in her July 2007 Court Manager article entitled "The Brave New World of Jury Technology", approximately 1/3 of courts maintain an in-house jury management system. However, 2/3 of all courts use some form of commercial jury software, proving that the technology boom is on the rise.
Increasingly aging software applications built in-house can't provide the advantages of web-based applications. One principal distinction lies in technical support and ongoing maintenance and operation. Web-based applications, like the jury management system from Courthouse Technologies, enable support options (such as automatic trouble ticket production directly from the application, web service options for automatic printing and mailing of summonses, embedded online training videos, etc.) that other kinds of systems can't provide, purely because of the architecture.
Another distinction remains the option for peripheral products for use in accord with web-based JMS systems. IVR and eResponse options create breakthrough communication pathways between the court and the jury candidate. Courthouse Technologies has since bridged the advancement gap by introducing a new feature that allows users to define their own Questionnaire then publish it to the Web via eResponse. Questionnaires can be used for Qualification, for supplemental information and as Exit Questionnaires.
So now, what happens to software, developed in-house, when the developing programmer leaves, becomes ill or retires? Is the system documented well enough for other staff to step in and run the system without catastrophe? The use of more sophisticated forms of automation dismisses the demand for numerous IT professionals to continually be on hand for support. Using a reliable vendor of commercial-off-the-shelf JMS, such as Courthouse JMS, also mitigates this.
The problem is, although many large jurisdictions of court like a state-wide judiciary or larger state court can afford to use their resources to look towards the future, smaller courts are being left behind, functionally and technologically, due to lack of resources, funding, or worse yet, complacency. Courthouse Technologies has made it their goal to ensure that all courts get the best possible technology regardless of their size or jurisdiction.
Back to list of Featured Articles
If upgrades to jury technology are the chief focus in your jury improvement efforts, then new technologies, such as web-based technologies, will provide a contemporary solution.
Quoting Paula Hannaford-Agor, Principal Court Research Consultant and the world's foremost jury expert from the NCSC: "Although web-based technology is ubiquitous in most areas of contemporary life, most courts have not embraced it for jury management purposes".
Why?
Don't these new web-based offerings propose tremendous improvements in the speed and ease of communication?
Don't these new web-based offerings provide juror orientation and organization to both the court and the prospective juror?
According to Paula in her July 2007 Court Manager article entitled "The Brave New World of Jury Technology", approximately 1/3 of courts maintain an in-house jury management system. However, 2/3 of all courts use some form of commercial jury software, proving that the technology boom is on the rise.
Increasingly aging software applications built in-house can't provide the advantages of web-based applications. One principal distinction lies in technical support and ongoing maintenance and operation. Web-based applications, like the jury management system from Courthouse Technologies, enable support options (such as automatic trouble ticket production directly from the application, web service options for automatic printing and mailing of summonses, embedded online training videos, etc.) that other kinds of systems can't provide, purely because of the architecture.
Another distinction remains the option for peripheral products for use in accord with web-based JMS systems. IVR and eResponse options create breakthrough communication pathways between the court and the jury candidate. Courthouse Technologies has since bridged the advancement gap by introducing a new feature that allows users to define their own Questionnaire then publish it to the Web via eResponse. Questionnaires can be used for Qualification, for supplemental information and as Exit Questionnaires.
So now, what happens to software, developed in-house, when the developing programmer leaves, becomes ill or retires? Is the system documented well enough for other staff to step in and run the system without catastrophe? The use of more sophisticated forms of automation dismisses the demand for numerous IT professionals to continually be on hand for support. Using a reliable vendor of commercial-off-the-shelf JMS, such as Courthouse JMS, also mitigates this.
The problem is, although many large jurisdictions of court like a state-wide judiciary or larger state court can afford to use their resources to look towards the future, smaller courts are being left behind, functionally and technologically, due to lack of resources, funding, or worse yet, complacency. Courthouse Technologies has made it their goal to ensure that all courts get the best possible technology regardless of their size or jurisdiction.
Back to list of Featured Articles
