RALEIGH Two high-profile murder cases have given jurors and potential jurors in Wake County a lingering case of the jitters.

Donald Stephens, the senior chief resident superior court judge, responded by issuing a blanket administrative order sealing juror addresses, phone numbers and questionnaires containing private information.

That drew scorn from public records advocates and media lawyers, who say it violates the constitution and jeopardizes the openness of judicial proceedings.

In two recent murder cases that were broadcast live from the courtroom, jurors have voiced concerns about being dragged into the spotlight and about details of their private lives becoming public.

The judge said he worried that jurors would not give their full attention to a case if they were apprehensive about possible encounters with the media or family of victims or defendants after the trial.

"I'm just exercising the authority of the court to create an environment in which jurors can do their job," Stephens said.

He entered the order in early June, shortly after jury selection began in the murder trial of Jason Young, who was accused of killing his wife.

Prosecutors and defense lawyers had issued all jury pool members a questionnaire that delved into each person's experiences with infidelity, an important issue in the case. Some expressed concerns about their responses being used against them elsewhere.

That case ended in a mistrial, but as it neared conclusion, jurors told court officials they were worried about being rushed by TV camera crews and others after deliberations.

Jurors also had fears during the spring murder trial of Brad Cooper, also accused of killing his wife, in a page-turner case that attracted an opinionated group of bloggers, tweeters and curious spectators. Members of the jury complained that people in the courtroom gallery were staring at them and making disturbing eye contact.

Stephens said his order was prompted by more than the Cooper and Young trials. In recent years, jurors have been asking more and more about their rights in the judicial process, a national trend that has been posing thorny legal questions over the past decade.

Though Stephens typically lets cameras into his courtrooms so the public can witness legal proceedings and have a fuller understanding of a verdict when it comes, lawyers for media organizations have criticized his order as limiting public access to legal proceedings that should be open.

Identifying information about jurors is important, public records advocates say, to maintain open courts set up in the Constitution.

"The records of North Carolina's courts - including information about jurors - are public, both under the public records law and under a specific statute that governs court records," said Amanda Martin, general counsel for the N.C. Press Association.

Steven Zansberg, a lawyer in Denver who explores the effects of digital media on the courts with the New Media Project, has kept tabs on the issue for years.

In 2000, he wrote about the clash between the rights of the public and press to information about jurors and jurors' rights to privacy.

At that time, courts and legislatures in at least eight states had considered measures to limit the disclosure of jurors' names and addresses. Some increased the use of anonymous juries.

Zansberg supports taking up each concern on a case-by-case basis.