The CSI Effect and the impact of DNA evidence on mock jurors and jury deliberations

ABSTRACT

The present research examined the CSI Effect and the impact of DNA evidence on mock jurors and jury deliberations using a 3 (Crime Drama Viewing: low, moderate, high)?×?3 (Evidence: DNA innocent, DNA guilty, no DNA control) design. A sample of 178 jury-eligible college students read a case of breaking and entering. Pre-deliberation, some support for a CSI Effect was found with high viewers’ extent of guilt ratings significantly lower than moderate and low viewers’ in the no DNA control and the DNA innocent conditions. This effect was not present for verdicts. Contrary to a CSI Effect, crime drama viewing was not related to guilt judgments with incriminating DNA evidence. A content analysis of comments made during deliberations found little support for the CSI Effect entering the jury room. Specifically, CSI Effect predictions were not supported when examining the discussion of DNA evidence, expressing DNA opinions, or mentioning missing evidence. Overall, the limited CSI Effect found for individuals was attenuated during deliberation. The alarm raised over a possible CSI Effect influencing jury decision making may be unwarranted.     

Impact of Juror Attitudes about the Death Penalty on Juror Evaluations of Guilt and Punishment: A Meta-Analysis

This literature review summarizes the existing research examining how the attitude a potential juror has toward the death penalty impacts on the probability of favoring conviction. The summary of 14 investigations indicates that a favorable attitude toward the death penalty is associated with an increased willingness to convict (average r = .174). Using the binomial effect size display, this favorable attitude towards the death penalty translates into a 44% increase in the probability of a juror favoring conviction.     

Decline of the English jury*

Abstract

This biographical study of the lived experiences of six law teachers offers a new dimension to understanding the dynamics of law teaching. The overall purpose of the study is to reveal how these law teachers make sense of the world of legal education in terms of individual identities, values and whether they necessarily regard themselves as academics. The significance of the study is the contribution it seeks to make in understanding individual law teachers and how they experience the dynamics of a rapidly changing teaching environment. The study reveals how different experiences emerge through a complex interplay between spheres of influence and theoretical frames of reference. A theoretical perspective considers three possible explanations, work orientation, performativity and supercomplexity, with regard to how experiences fit within apparent epistemological shifts in the academy.

The biographical method has not hitherto been applied to understanding this dimension of legal education. The purpose in adopting this method is to make a deliberate departure from more traditional research methods in legal education and to determine the extent to which it might be possible to see the world of legal education as a lived experience. This approach provides tools of analysis for understanding the dynamics of law teaching and dynamic identities.     

Juror adjustments to the reasonable doubt standard of proof

The standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is based on the law's primary motivation to avoid false conviction even at the expense of increasing the probability of false acquittal. Individual jurors, however, have common sense motivations to make factually correct decisions by avoiding both types of error. As a result jurors may interpret the standard of reasonable doubt correctly but deviate from that interpretation in predictable ways when they apply the standard in court. This study makes three hypotheses: (1) jurors are less confident when deciding on acquittal than when deciding upon conviction, (2) conviction is associated with a downward adjustment of the interpreted stringency of the standard at the time of application, and (3) a highly stringent interpretation of the standard is associated with a severe downward adjustment of that stringency at the time of application. The study asked 260 juror-eligible participants to examine a trial scenario. The participants first interpreted the stringency of the legal standard on a probability scale. They then judged the probability of the defendant's guilt, decided on a verdict, and rated their confidence in that verdict. The findings strongly supported all three hypotheses. Application and implication of the study were discussed.     

Impact of hypnotic testimony on the jury

In the past decade, the forensic use of hypnosis to enhance the memories of victims, witnesses, and defendants has sharply increased. A great deal of controversy surrounds this issue. Some commentators argue that testimony derived from hypnosis should not be allowed as evidence because of its inherent unreliability and the unduly powerful impact it may have on a jury. In the present research, we used a jury simulation technique to study the impact that a hypnotically refreshed witness has upon jurors' decision making. A major finding is that jurors view hypnotic testimony with a certain amount of skepticism. In some respects, its impact is comparable to that of testimony based on delayed recall, and rarely does it have the impact of testimony from an immediate report. In addition, jurors' judgments about hypnotically refreshed testimony affected the way they evaluated other evidence at trial: Jurors who learned that a prosecution witness had been hypnotized were less believing ofother prosecution witnesses than were jurors not exposed to hypnotic testimony. The forensic application of these findings is discussed.This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation, Law and Social Sciences Program. We thank Jane Goodman, Doug Leber, Bonnie Sawnson, Russ Wade, Karen Guest, Jonna Barsanti, Don Kline, Elaine Sullivan, and David Kuykendall for their help at various stages of the project.     

Empirical assessment of the escabinato jury system

Abstract

There are two practical applications of the jury system: the jury of lay people and the escabinato jury involving joint decision making by legal experts and lay people. Research undertaken in this field has been almost exclusively centered on the former. This work consists of an empirical study of the role of legal suggest that the loss of a jury of peers implies the dominance of the judge's opinion. The causes and consequences of this domination have been assessed.     

Effects of Experiencing the Eyewitness Identification Procedure on Juror Decisions

Mistaken eyewitness identifications are believed to contribute to a preponderance of wrongful convictions, underscoring the need to identify methods to help decrease the likelihood of false convictions based on eyewitness testimony. The present study tested the hypothesis that providing jurors with first-hand experience with eyewitness identification procedures could help further sensitize them to the limitations of eyewitness testimony. Eighty college students watched a videotaped mock trial in which the prosecution’s sole evidence was eyewitness testimony. In a 2 × 2 randomized factorial design, we manipulated whether participants heard expert psychological testimony (henceforth referred to as expert testimony) on the limitations of eyewitness identification and whether they experienced an eyewitness identification procedure. As predicted, experiencing the eyewitness identification procedure had a significant impact on juror decisions, suggesting that this procedure could further help reduce the likelihood of wrongful convictions.     

The death-qualified jury and the defense of insanity

We predicted that people who are excluded from serving on juries in capital cases due to their opposition to the death penalty (excludable subjects) tend to place a greater value on the preservation of due process guarantees than on efficient crime control, and therefore are more likely to accept an insanity defense in criminal cases than are people who are permitted to serve on capital juries (death-qualified subjects). Subjects who had previously been classified as death-qualified or excludable read four summaries of cases in which the defendant entered a plea of insanity, and made judgments of guilt or innocence. In the two cases involving nonorganic disorders (schizophrenia), death-qualified subjects were significantly more likely than excludable subjects to vote guilty; in the two cases involving organic disorders (mental retardation and psychomotor epilepsy), there were no differences between the two groups. In addition, excludable subjects gave significantly higher estimates than death-qualified subjects of the proportion of defendants pleading insanity who really are insane.     

The representative jury requirement: Jury representativeness and cross sectional participation from the beginning to the end of the jury selection process

The paper specifically addresses the many ways in which the facially neutral procedures actually fail to secure representative jury pools. Although the Sixth Amendment's fair cross‐section requirement forbids systematic discrimination in the creation of the jury venire and panel, it does not guarantee that the criminal jury will in fact reflect an accurate cross‐section of the community. As a result, not only does the Court fail to focus on nonlegally recognized screening mechanisms and factors such as exemptions, excuses, failure to followup jurors, etc., may affect jury representativeness, but also the Court never examined cross‐sectional representation at the entirety of the jury selection processes, except jury panels and final juries.

The first section of this paper presents a brief overview of the constitutional law impacting impartial juries, especially addressing the fair cross‐section doctrine that is the focus of contemporary jury selection procedures. In providing empirical and systematic comparisons of jury participation at each of the distinct jury selection stages encompassing a general population, jury wheels, jury qualified pools, jury eligibles, jury panels, and actual trial jurors, the second section of this paper makes critical analyses of the cumulative effects of screening mechanisms in jury selection. The paper assesses jury compositions by looking at demographic, socio‐economic, and ideological profiles of prospective jurors, illustrating that those jury profiles do not necessarily reflect cross‐sectional representation of the community population at comprehensive stages of the jury selection process. The analytical findings show that unless some deep seated reforms are made to eliminate cumulative effects of selection biases and correct representative imbalances of jury wheels, qualified pools, jury panels, and trial juries, historically underrepresented groups such as racial minorities, the poor, and part‐time employees will continue to be underrepresented on juries, negating the public's shared responsibility for the administration of justice in one of America's most heralded democratic institutions.     

The basis of citizen's perceptions of the criminal jury

Two studies examined citizens' perceptions of the criminal jury and their evaluations of 6- or 12-person juries operating under unanimous or majority decision rules. Study 1 was a telephone survey of 130 adult citizens in which respondents evaluated alternative jury structures in the abstract. In Study 2, students were asked to evaluate jury structures for a hypothetical trial in which they were either the defendant or the victim in a crime with a mild or serious outcome. In both studies, jury size and decision rule were related to ratings of procedural cost, and the severity of the crime moderated procedural evaluations. In Study 1, juries were preferred to judges and the 12-person unanimous jury was preferred over other jury structures when the crime involved was serious. In Study 2, there were no direct effects due to variations in jury structure, but subjects appeared to trade off procedural cost and thoroughness of deliberation as a function of the seriousness of the crime. Procedural fairness emerged as the strongest independent predictor of desirability for jury procedures, and fairness was related to representativeness and accuracy. The role manipulation did not influence subjects' responses. In both studies, respondents were very supportive of the jury as an institution, despite a perception that erroneous jury verdicts do occur.     

Explaining Sexual Harassment Judgments: Looking Beyond Gender of the Rater

Law and Human Behavior - In two decades of research on sexual harassment, one finding that appears repeatedly is that gender of the rater influences judgments about sexual harassment such that...     

陪审制度的制约机能比较研究

陪审制,是当代西方司法制度的一个重要组成部分。它源远流长,起伏跌宕,荣辱兴衰共具一身。时至今日,陪审制仍是英美法系国家中制约审判的一个重要手段。本文力求对两大法系陪审制的作用及其制约机能进行比较研究,一方面可深探陪审制度的精髓,另一方面可为我国的人民陪审制提供可借鉴的经验。 一、陪审制的产生与发展 如果它也算陪审制的话,我们应该将历史的目光放至那遥远的古希腊。公元前594年,梭伦当选为雅典的执政官,他首创了陪审法庭的新制度。实际上,是在集市日的市场上审理诉讼案,一些有闲暇的公民可以参加。后来,这种制度成为雅典民主制的一个重要组成部分,使公民具有了“参与审判”的权利。古罗马时期亦有陪审制的存在,但在公     

Meta-analysis of mock crime studies of the control question polygraph technique

A review of results obtained from standard guilty and innocent treatment conditions in 14 mock crime studies of the control question polygraph technique revealed accuracies ranging from chance to 100% correct. The present study examined several factors that may have contributed to the observed variability in detection rates across studies. Those included sampling error, differences in the populations from which subjects were drawn (Subjects), differences in the nature of incentives provided to subjects for passing the polygraph test (Incentives), and differences in the methods for diagnosing truth or deception (Decision Policy). A meta-analysis revealed that approximately 24% of the variance in detection rates could be attributed to sampling error, and detection rates were correlated with types of Subjects (r=.61). Incentives (r=.73), and Decision Policies (r=.67). The highest diagnostic accuracies were obtained from nonstudent subject samples, when both guilty and innocent subjects were offered monetary incentives to convince the examiner of their innocence, and when conventional field methods were used for interpreting the physiological recordings and diagnosing truth and deception. Together, differences in Subjects, Incentives, and Decision Policies may account for as much as 65% of the observed variance in detection rates. The present findings highlight the importance of conducting mock crime experiments that closely approximate field conditions.     

Ageism in the courtroom: mock juror perceptions of elder neglect

The present study explored ageism in a civil court context. In two experiments, male and female undergraduates (Experiment 1; N?=?215) and community members (Experiment 2; N?=?203) read an institutional elder neglect trial summary in which a nursing home was sued for failure to provide the necessary care for an elderly female resident. The trial varied as to who provided witness testimony: the live victim, a recorded deposition from the victim, the victim’s middle-aged niece (Experiments 1, 2), the victim’s elderly floor-mate (Experiment 1), or no testimony was provided (Experiment 2). Across both experiments, higher ageism was negatively associated with pro-victim ratings (e.g. victim memory). Ageism indirectly decreased the likelihood of ruling for the plaintiff through ratings of sympathy for the victim and victim memory (Experiment 1), and defendant responsibility (Experiment 2). Trial ratings did not differ based on whether victim testimony was presented live or via recorded deposition (Experiments 1, 2). The results suggest that jurors’ ageist attitudes may engender negative perceptions of an elderly victim, which can affect the outcome of neglect cases. We discuss the potential for these findings to inform legal proceedings and protection of elderly individuals.     

Effects of the dynamite charge on the deliberations of deadlocked mock juries

When juries report that they are deadlocked, judges often deliver the dynamite charge, a supplemental instruction that urges jurors to rethink their views in an effort to reach a unanimous verdict. The present study evaluated the impact of this procedure on 378 subjects who participated in 63 deadlocked mock juries. Results indicated that the dynamite charge caused jurors in the voting minority to feel coerced and change their votes, reduced the pressure felt by those in the majority, and hastened the deliberation process in juries that favored conviction. These findings raise serious questions concerning the use of this controversial charge.     

环境司法专门化背景下专家陪审员制度研究

为正确认定环境诉讼中的证据和事实,提高司法公信力,建议建立专家陪审员参与环境案件审理的制度.环境案件专业性、技术性和复杂性较强,专家陪审员直接参加审理,能够弥补法官环境专业知识的不足,解决环境案件审理中的技术难题,这对科学认定案件事实、有效监督人民法院审判工作,切实提升环境司法公信力具有重要意义.在借鉴知识产权审判与地...     

An economic analysis of the right to a jury trial

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.… 6th Amendment, US Constitution