The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments

This study examines three previously unexplored aspects of the biasing impact of pretrial publicity. First, this study tests the differential effects of several different types of pretrial publicity on juror decision making. Second, this study explores the impact the presentation of trial evidence has on biases created by pretrial publicity. Finally, the study explores the psychological processes by which pretrial publicity effects may operate. Results indicate that pretrial publicity, particularly negative information about the defendant's character, can influence subjects' initial judgments about a defendant's guilt. This bias is weakened, but not eliminated by the presentation of trial evidence. Character pretrial publicity, and both weak and strong inadmissible statements appear to operate by changing subjects' initial judgments of the defendant's guilt. This initial judgment then affects the way subjects assess the evidence presented in the trial and the attributions they make about the defendant. Prior record pretrial publicity appears to have its effects by influencing subjects' inferences about the criminality of the defendant and this is related to posttrial judgments.     

The Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Juror Verdicts: A Meta-Analytic Review

The effect of pretrial publicity (PTP) on juror verdicts was examined through a meta-analysis of 44 empirical tests representing 5,755 subjects. In support of the hypothesis, subjects exposed to negative PTP were significantly more likely to judge the defendant guilty compared to subjects exposed to less or no negative PTP. Greater effect sizes were produced in studies which included a pretrial verdict assessment, use of the potential juror pool as subjects, multiple points of negative information included in the PTP, real PTP, crimes of murder, sexual abuse, or drugs, and greater length of time between PTP exposure and judgment. The effect was attenuated with student subjects, use of general rather than specific PTP information, certain types of PTP content, a post-trial predeliberation verdict, and specific types of crimes. Implications of these results are discussed, along with possible mechanisms that underlie the PTP effect.     

Effects of pretrial juror bias,strength of evidence and deliberation process on juror decisions: new validity evidence of the Juror Bias Scale scores

This study examines the validity of the Juror Bias Scale scores in relation to the mock juror decisions reached in two real life homicide cases before and after the deliberation process. The judicial cases used varied in terms of the ambiguity of the evidence presented at both trials. The WLS methodology for statistical modelling of categorical data was used to analyse data. The findings indicated that the Juror Bias Scale scores successfully predict the verdicts and other related questions before and after deliberations in the case with ambiguous evidence. Furthermore, deliberations caused a generalisation effect on the pretrial juror bias in such a case, and enhanced the differences between defense-biased and prosecution-biased jurors in the verdicts delivered after deliberations. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the use of pretrial juror bias questionnaires in jury selection.     

Chaos in The Courtroom Reconsidered: Emotional Bias and Juror Nullification

A widespread presumption in the law is that giving jurors nullification instructions would result in "chaos"-jurors guided not by law but by their emotions and personal biases. We propose a model of juror nullification that posits an interaction between the nature of the trial (viz. whether the fairness of the law is at issue), nullification instructions, and emotional biases on juror decision-making. Mock jurors considered a trial online which varied the presence a nullification instructions, whether the trial raised issues of the law's fairness (murder for profit vs. euthanasia), and emotionally biasing information (that affected jurors' liking for the victim). Only when jurors were in receipt of nullification instructions in a nullification-relevant trial were they sensitive to emotionally biasing information. Emotional biases did not affect evidence processing but did affect emotional reactions and verdicts, providing the strongest support to date for the chaos theory.     

Biasing effects of pretrial publicity on judicial decisions

In a four-factor design, the effects on judicial decisions of sample (102 students versus 100 nonstudents), sex of subject, pretrial publicity (damaging and relevant versus irrelevant), and judge's instructions (warning to disregard pretrial publicity versus a neutral statement) were examined. Results indicated that sample and judge's instructions had no effects on verdicts, recommendations for sentencing, or ratings of the strength of the prosecution and defenses' cases. Pretrial publicity, however, exerted a strong influence on verdicts and ratings of the prosecution's case, particularly among females. It is suggested that pretrial publicity may serve to affect evaluations of the evidence presented at the trial.     

Predicting verdicts,adherence to judge's instructions,and assumptions about the disposition of the defendant in a case involving the insanity defense

Abstract

296 college students and jury eligible adults completed attitudinal measures and read a case summary of a murder trial involving the insanity defense. The case summary included opening and closing arguments, testimony from expert witnesses, and judge's instructions. Although broader legal attitudes (the PJAQ) predicted verdicts, the Insanity Defense Attitudes-Revised scale provided incremental predictive validity. Attitudes related to the insanity defense also predicted adherence to judge's instructions, whereas more general legal biases predicted a juror's willingness to change their verdict after being provided with accurate information about the defendant's disposition following the verdict. Importantly, misconceptions concerning the insanity defense impacted verdicts and many jurors made decisions that failed to adhere to the judge's instructions, though the nullification tendency does appear to vary as a function of pretrial juror attitudes. Implications for instructing jurors in insanity defense cases will be discussed.     

A journey into the unknown: Pretrial publicity and capital cases

This article examines issues related to pretrial publicity's role in the free press‐fair trial debate. First, the article provides a comprehensive review of existing research examining the effects of pretrial publicity on case outcomes. Second, it examines the presentation of prejudicial publicity items in a sample of newspaper stories on capital cases, identifying the types of factual and emotional publicity presented and suggesting areas that need to be more closely scrutinized in future research. The article concludes that cases that ultimately result in sentences of death receive both more and different types of pretrial publicity than cases that result in lesser sentences. The current state of empirical pretrial publicity knowledge, and the presentation of death cases, are discussed as they relate to the balancing of First and Sixth amendment rights.     

Methodological Considerations in Pretrial Publicity Research: Is the Medium the Message?

Two methodological issues within the pretrial publicity (PTP) literature were examined in the present experiment: the effect of emotional versus factual PTP and the effect of presenting PTP through different media. Emotional and factual PTP were constructed that differed in level of emotionality, but produced the same degree of bias. The PTP was presented in either a videotaped or written format. Although there was a significantly biasing effect of PTP overall compared to a control condition, no significant difference was found either between factual and emotional PTP or between video and written PTP.     

The role of behavioral research in the free press/fair trial controversy

The role of behavioral research in the “free press-fair trial” controversy is reexamined in light of the recent article by Carroll, Kerr, Alfini, Weaver, MacCoun, and Feldman (1986). It is concluded that while further research is needed, as suggested by Carroll et al., behavioral research on the impact of pretrial publicity and judicial remedies already offers some useful guidance for the judicial system. In addition, a guideline is proposed for deciding if the empirical literature on a given issue is sufficiently strong to employ in legal decision making.     

Informing Jurors of Their Nullification Power: A Route to a Just Verdict or Judicial Chaos?

The current studies sought to test whether explicitly informing jurors of their power to nullify the law does invite chaos, defined by jurists as undisciplined and biased juror judgment. A series of four studies examined juror biases predicated on defendant status, remorse, gender, national origin, penalty severity, and extenuating circumstances. None, however, were amplified by nullification instructions, providing little evidence that such instructions invite chaos with respect to the biases examined in these studies. To the contrary, several results suggested that nullification instructions simply encourage jurors to nullify when the strict application of the law would result in an unjust verdict. Limitations of the studies and public policy issues are discussed.     

未决羁押制度的理论反思

在中国刑事诉讼中 ,未决羁押与刑事拘留、逮捕无论在实体条件还是适用程序上都没有发生分离。同时 ,无论在审判之前还是审判阶段 ,羁押的适用几乎完全依附于刑事追诉活动 ,而没有形成独立的、封闭的司法控制系统。由此 ,未决羁押制度在启动、审查、期限、场所、救济等方面都存在着明显的缺陷。要完善对未决羁押的法律控制 ,就必须贯彻法治原则 ,引入针对未决羁押的司法审查机制。而这会直接涉及到整个司法体制甚至宪政体制的改革问题。     

Examining the Construct Validity of the Original and Revised JBS: A Cross-Validation of Sample and Method

Factor analysis is a statistical technique that can provide an understanding of construct validity. Previous research examining the factor structure of the Juror Bias Scale (JBS) has uncovered problems in the scale's assessment of the constructs of probability of commission (PC) and reasonable doubt (RD). We here reevaluate the scale's constructs to better our understanding of the pretrial biases involved in the juror decision-making process. Importantly, previous findings have been limited to college student samples and trial material that has involved rape evidence. This study examines the construct validity of the JBS in a sample of 617 jury-eligible adults drawn from the community, and the predictive validity of the JBS is examined across 3 distinct trial scenarios. The results parallel earlier findings, indicating that although RD is a tenable and useful construct affecting juror decision-making, PC may be a less relevant pretrial bias. We therefore suggest that future research emphasize alternative constructs, such as confidence and cynicism in the criminal justice system.     

政府信息公开行政诉讼有关问题研究

正确适用《政府信息公开条例》,依法审理政府信息公开行政案件,对于推进服务型政府建设、保障社会公众的知情权具有重要意义。但是,作为一种新类型案件,政府信息公开案件在司法实践中争议颇多,而政府信息的界定、政府信息公开例外情形的把握、政府信息公开案件的裁判方式和诉权滥用的防范应对等问题尤为值得关注,司法审查层面须有判断标准和合理应对。     

The Effects of General Pretrial Publicity on Juror Decisions: An Examination of Moderators and Mediating Mechanisms

Two studies examined three moderators (gender, attitudes, and media slant) and four mediators (accessibility, evidence importance, evidence plausibility, and standards of guilt) of general pretrial publicity's influence on juror decisions. In Study 1, participants who watched a prodefense rape story were more likely to report that they would need more inculpatory evidence to convict a defendant of rape than were participants who watched a proprosecution rape story. In Study 2, participants watched news stories, one of which was a proprosecution rape story, a prodefense rape story, or a nonrape story. In an ostensibly unrelated study, participants indicated their attitudes toward rape, watched a rape trial, and provided trial and witness ratings. Accessibility did not mediate the media effects on participants' judgments of rape importance; however, attitudes moderated media effects. Rape news influenced juror ratings of the importance of evidence about the complainant's behavior. Finally, media altered the standards participants used to determine defendant guilt. Implications for understanding the mechanisms responsible for pretrial publicity effects are discussed.     

Knowing when the camera lies: Judicial instructions mitigate the camera perspective bias

Purpose. Videotaped confession evidence elicits harsher evaluations against a defendant if initially recorded with the camera focused primarily on the suspect, compared with other presentation formats. Unfortunately, most videotaped confession evidence employs this biasing suspect‐focus camera perspective format, leaving defendants with no recourse. The present study examined the utility of judicial instructions in mitigating the effects of the camera perspective bias on individual juror verdicts. Methods. Through random assignment, 156 mock jurors did or did not receive explicit instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias prior to viewing a video recording of an authentic true or false confession. Results. As expected, mock jurors who received instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias reported more lenient judgments of confessor guilt after viewing a suspect‐focus confession recording compared to those who did not receive such instructions. However, this relative leniency emerged only in response to false, and not true, confessions. Conclusions. Results demonstrated that judicial instructions used in the present research mitigated the effect of camera perspective on mock‐juror judgments of suspect guilt.     

The Impact on Juror Verdicts of Judicial Instruction to Disregard Inadmissible Evidence: A Meta-Analysis

The effect on juror verdicts of judicial instructions to disregard inadmissible evidence was evaluated using meta-analysis. One hundred seventy-five hypothesis tests from 48 studies with a combined 8,474 participants were examined. Results revealed that inadmissible evidence (IE) has a reliable effect on verdicts consistent with the content of the IE. Judicial instruction to ignore the inadmissible evidence does not effectively eliminate IE impact. However, if judges provide a rationale for a ruling of inadmissibility, juror compliance may be increased. Contested evidence ruled admissible accentuates that information, resulting in a significant impact on verdicts. Suggestions for how the courts may mitigate the impact of inadmissible evidence more effectively are discussed.     

The effects of judicial admonitions on hearsay evidence

Using a simulated civil case, this experiment investigated whether mock jurors: (a) are able to disregard hearsay evidence when admonished to do so, (b) experience psychological reactance and "backfire effects" in proportion to the strength of judicial admonition instructing them to disregard hearsay evidence, and (c) are able to recognize and disregard hearsay evidence without judicial instructions. Results indicate that jurors were unable to disregard inadmissible hearsay testimony in some legal decisions regardless of whether there were judicial instructions to do so. Jurors exhibited backfire effects paying more attention to inadmissible hearsay evidence when they were strongly instructed to disregard it. More specifically, juror backfire effects were evident in both their confidence in their liability verdicts and in their punitive damage awards. The legal and policy implications of these findings are discussed.     

Racial prejudice in the canadian legal system

The effects of defendant and victim race and the impact of judicial instructions on defendant verdict were examined using a simulated videotaped rape trial. Subjects were 243 Canadian university students randomly assigned to one of eight conditions. Subjects were asked to assume the role of juror and to view a videotape of a simulated rape trial. The results indicated that the defendant's overall attractiveness or “positive appeal” was the best predictor of defendant guilt, above and beyond defendant race. Neither victim characteristics nor the presence of judicial instructions was found to have predictive utility. Results are contrasted with findings from simulation studies in the United States.     

Press articles and influence processes: the different effects of incriminating information and crime story information on judgments of guilt

The present study examines how potential jury members' judgments are affected by two types of information provided by the media: (1) information that is directly incriminating for the accused and (2) crime story information, that is, information about the events of the crime but not directly pertaining to the defendant's innocence or guilt. Although the influence of directly incriminating information has been widely researched, the effect of crime story information has never been studied. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that incriminating information affects judgments directly, whereas crime story information affects judgments indirectly via the arousal of negative emotions. We did this by coding the two types of information in 78 press articles about a criminal trial heard in France. Participants (N = 312) were asked to read the articles and then indicate their anger arousal and give their judgment about the accused. The results support our hypothesis. We conclude by discussing the contribution of our findings to research into the media's influence on legal cases.