> Jurors' identities are not generally a secret.[0] There are exceptions
I was talking about the exceptions. If there are exceptions, a way to handle them must exist, is all I was saying.
> but those exceptions do not extend to wiping that person's data from things like pharmacy and gas station reward card databases.
I was asking about the companies who obtain this original information, not pharmacies' or gas stations' databases themselves. I feel like you're not understanding my question?
> Honestly your entire premise shows a lack of understanding of how the criminal justice system works.
Quiet likely (I'm not claiming otherwise; I'm not a lawyer and I haven't exactly been involved in legal proceedings) and I didn't claim otherwise. Also hardly undermines my point. Like I've said in some 3-4 other comments, someone who e.g. starts a new company like InstantCheckmate has to know whom to buy the data from -- like I said, there's no way all of these companies contact all grocery stores and all doctors. That's insane. Someone's gotta be doing the heavy lifting and making money off it. I'm asking who this is. I asked this in the original post. If the court example is wrong or otherwise bothers you just ignore it. If someone not already involved in the business knows to contact these companies to obtain information, someone must know who they are, is all I'm saying. Otherwise they would not exist.