Personally, I find the law and trials fascinating, but I understand they are not everyone’s cup of tea. Take the juror in R. v. Anderson, 2021 ONCA 45 for instance; he seems to enjoy other interests. We know this as it appears he may have fallen asleep during part of that trial.
Anderson was ultimately convicted. He appealed, alleging (among other things) that a somnolent juror causes a real danger of prejudice. That is not hard to accept, as a jury’s responsibility in a trial is to make determinations of fact—a task better performed awake than asleep.
The problem with Anderson’s argument was that his trial counsel didn’t raise an objection while the juror was allegedly dozing and only made passing reference to it after it had happened. The ONCA inferred from this that the incident was not a significant one.
Also, Anderson was not in a position at the time of the appeal to be able to prove that the juror had in fact fallen asleep. By not raising his concern promptly during the trial, there had been no inquiry by the court into whether the juror had actually been sleeping.
Let sleeping dogs lie, but not sleeping jurors.