The New York Penal Law only authorizes a very limited number of things to be taken by the jurors into their deliberations, and written jury instructions are not among them. It can be reversible error to give them jury instructions - especially if those jury instructions include the text of a statute, which is not allowed to be sent in with them.

--------------------

As an aside, this is one of those peculiarities of the law the vast majority of people don't know and, when informed about it, it seems to make no sense. What is the rationale for not allowing jurors to see a written copy of verbal directions they were just given? What is the rationale for jurors to not have a written copy of the laws cited by the judge as applicable in the case?

As I've been watching coverage of this trial and contemplating how the jury will work to land on a verdict, I've imagined having the text of the charges available to draw a chart on a board and draw lines to specific items all jurors agree upon as ruling in or out a particular fact or charge to know that everything has been covered. To have to do most of that deliberation from memory rather than paper seems tedious and prone to omissions and mistakes.

After seeing that this IS the law in New York State (and probably other states), I would have to assume the purpose of such constraints is to force the jury to raise their hand and obtain "professional" guidance from the judge by formally asking a question, rather than just staring at a legal text in the room and further mis-interpreting it. Certainly, you don't want the jurors google searching a law online because it's too easy to have a keyword search land on a similar but NOT identical / applicable law and drive thinking in an invalid direction.

On the other hand, we have become so conditioned to being able to scroll through something rather than HAVING to listen to someone to get a question answered, it must be a weird dynamic to encounter in such a high-profile situation.

WTH