Prosecution claims they did not have enough time to redact audio from video evidence so the judge instructed the jury to redact the audio themselves by pressing mute at the appropriate times. The juror in charge of redaction failed to do so at one point and the jury heard evidence that was supposed to be redacted. The judge instructed jury to disregard what they heard and allowed the jury to continue deliberations with the tech savvy juror still in charge of redacting audio. Hamilton County, OVI case,
I do not know the answer to this question off the top of my head, but it sounds seriously suspect. Great issue for appeal. I wouldn't be surprised to find out there is no law on this point yet since I have never heard of anyone even trying this.
