McDonald v. Pless, 238 U.S. 264, 267, 35 S.Ct. 783, 59 L.Ed. 1300 (1915); United States v. Lloyd, 269 F.3d 228, 237 (3d Cir.2001); Wilson, 170 F.3d at 394; Gov’t of V.I. v. Gereau, 523 F.2d 140, 148 (3d Cir.1975). The rule promotes several public policies, including “promoting] finality of verdicts, encouraging] free deliberations among jurors, and maintaining] the integrity of the jury as a judicial decision-making body.” Lloyd, 269 F.3d at 237. However, an exception to the general prohibition against evidence of jury deliberations permits inquiry into extraneous prejudicial influence, so as to insure defendants’ guilt was determined by unbiased juries based solely upon evidence properly admitted in court. Mattox v. United States, 146 U.S. 140, 149, 13 S.Ct. 50, 36 L.Ed. 917 (1892) (<HOLDING>); Lloyd, 269 F.3d at 237. Codifying the
recognizing that laws and regulations may bear upon the existence of a constitutional interest recognizing that pursuant to statute actions of debt may be brought upon any judgment for debt damages or costs rendered in any court of record of the united states holding that the initial inquiry for a court called upon to rule upon the qualified immunity issue is whether the facts alleged show the violation of a constitutional right holding a juryman may testify to any facts bearing upon the question of the existence of any extraneous influence although not as to how far that influence operated upon his mind recognizing that courts should not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by the record if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be disposed of