Reference health
Guilty as Tweeted: Jurors Using Social Media Inappropriately During the Trial Process
2 of 28 checkable references need attention · checked 2026-08-31
At the dated check, the references listed below either did not resolve in Crossref or DataCite, or carried a retraction notice. Each one is shown with the registry record that put it there.
83 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
References needing attention
does not resolve to a known work10.1787/dcr-2009-table3_3-en
does not resolve to a known work10.1163/2214-8647_bnp_e1503470
The 26 checked references that resolve
resolves10.2307/3302290
Maryland Court of Appeals. December, 1852. Albert and Wife vs. The City of Baltimore and the Savings Bank of Baltimore
resolves10.1093/ww/9780199540884.013.u58378
Storkey, Percy Valentine, (9 Sept. 1893–3 Oct. 1969), Barrister-at-law; Judge, District Court, Northern Circuit, NSW, Australia, retired December 1955
resolves10.21273/hortsci.48.12.1568
‘Ebony Embers’, ‘Ebony Fire’, ‘Ebony Flame’, ‘Ebony Glow’, and ‘Ebony and Ivory’ Dark-leaf Crapemyrtles
resolves10.1093/geront/gnv163.02
THE FRAILL PROJECT – INVESTIGATING AGING AND FRAILTY IN LATER LIFE USING UNTARGETED SERUM METABOLOMICS
resolves10.1017/s1537592711003264
Legal Imperialism: Sovereignty and Extraterritoriality in Japan, the Ottoman Empire, and China. By Turan Kayaoğlu. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 248p. $90.00.
resolves10.2172/10135385
LIFAC Sorbent Injection Desulfurization Demonstration Project. Quarterly report No. 12, July--September 1993
resolves10.1093/anb/9780198606697.article.1100776
Shaw, Lemuel (1781-1861), chief justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The 83 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref1
no DOI — not checkedref2
no DOI — not checkedref4
no DOI — not checkedref10
no DOI — not checkedref13
no DOI — not checkedref14
no DOI — not checkedref18
no DOI — not checkedref19
no DOI — not checkedref20
no DOI — not checkedref22
no DOI — not checkedref30
no DOI — not checkedref33
no DOI — not checkedref37
no DOI — not checkedref47
no DOI — not checkedContempt of Court; HM Attorney General v Fraill and Sewart; R v Knox -Juror
no DOI — not checkedref53
no DOI — not checkedref56
no DOI — not checkedref57
no DOI — not checkedref59
no DOI — not checkedref61
no DOI — not checkedref62
no DOI — not checkedref82
no DOI — not checkedref83
no DOI — not checkedref84
no DOI — not checkedref85
no DOI — not checkedref86
no DOI — not checkedref107
no DOI — not checkedref108
no DOI — not checked730 A friend wrote 'why' to his 9 March 2009 status update 731 and Wuest responded 'think of the last five months dear.' 732 The court also believed that a second status update may have been made about one of the status updates above. 733 A friend may have written 'of what?' 734 after Wuest's 4 March 2009 status update
no DOI — not checkedref110
no DOI — not checkedWuest raised no specific facts dealing with the trial, and nothing in these comments indicated any disposition toward anyone involved in the suit. Even a "friend" was so clueless about the significance of his March 9 th comment that she was compelled to inquire as to its meaning. His response to her query, by its very coyness, suggested that Wuest, while acknowledging his jury duty, actively avoided discussing any details. Certainly, he was under no obligation to conceal his jury duty from friends or family
no DOI — not checkedWuest was a trustworthy juror who was very conscientious of his duties. There was no evidence presented by either party showing that his extra-jury misconduct had a prejudicial impact on the Defendants. The Court found, and still maintains, that Wuest's actions in no way affected his impartiality. Accordingly, the Court denies Defendants' request for a new trial as a result of juror Wuest's extra-jury misconduct
no DOI — not checkedref128
no DOI — not checkedref129
no DOI — not checkedref130
no DOI — not checkedref131
no DOI — not checkedref132
no DOI — not checkedref133
no DOI — not checkedref168
no DOI — not checkedref169
no DOI — not checkedJuror's Facebook Postings Pose Problems
no DOI — not checkedRoseboro Appeal Questions 2 'Errors'
no DOI — not checkedref175
no DOI — not checkedref176
no DOI — not checkedref177
no DOI — not checkedref178
no DOI — not checkedref179
no DOI — not checkedref180
no DOI — not checkedref181
no DOI — not checkedref182
no DOI — not checkedref183
no DOI — not checkedref184
no DOI — not checkedref185
no DOI — not checkedref186
no DOI — not checkedref187
no DOI — not checkedref188
no DOI — not checkedref189
no DOI — not checkedref190
no DOI — not checkedref191
no DOI — not checkedref192
no DOI — not checkedref193
no DOI — not checkedref194
no DOI — not checkedref195
no DOI — not checkedref196
no DOI — not checkedref197
no DOI — not checkedref198
no DOI — not checkedref199
no DOI — not checkedref200
no DOI — not checkedref201
no DOI — not checkedref202
no DOI — not checkedref203
no DOI — not checkedref205
no DOI — not checkedref206
no DOI — not checkedref207
no DOI — not checkedref208
no DOI — not checkedref210
no DOI — not checkedref211
no DOI — not checkedref212
no DOI — not checkedref213
no DOI — not checkedref216
no DOI — not checkedA Consortium of Universities Seeks to Study Social Media's Impact on Trials
no DOI — not checkedStates to tackle Social Media Laws After Alarm Over Fair Trial for Accused
no DOI — not checkedref222
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-08-31 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2176634"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2176634/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.2176634)