What constitutes a lawyer's improper influence in a tribunal setting?

The answer is particularly focused on the conduct of a lawyer in relation to jurors. A lawyer's attempts to persuade a juror outside of official proceedings constitute improper influence because this behavior undermines the integrity of the judicial process. It interferes with the juror's ability to assess the case based solely on the evidence and arguments presented in court. This action is also considered a violation of ethical standards and rules that govern a lawyer's interaction with jurors, ensuring that all juror communications occur within the formal context of the court proceedings.

This principle is important to maintain a fair trial, as jurors should remain impartial and uninfluenced by any external communications or pressures when reaching a verdict. In the context of legal ethics, protecting the sanctity of jury deliberations is paramount, which is why this behavior is taken seriously by legal authorities.

In contrast, while the communication with judges or providing advice to jurors could raise ethical concerns, they do not directly fall under the category of improper influence as specifically defined in relation to attempts to persuade jurors outside of court. Thus, these situations may have their own separate considerations regarding professional conduct, but they do not reflect the same level of direct influence as persuading a juror outside official proceedings does