Victim participation in criminal trials in Japan

Since 2000, the Japanese Code of Criminal Procedure has been revised twice to introduce into criminal trials two systems of victim participation: the Victim’s Statement of Opinion (VSO) and the Victim Participation System. This study addresses the impact of those systems on decision-making in criminal trials, with special focus on the impact on sentencing. Following a literature review are the early findings from my psychological experiment which focuses on sentencing by lay judges. The results indicate that information concerning crime victims does have an impact on sentencing, but it is immaterial whether or not the information is submitted through recently introduced systems. Evaluations of those systems from the perspectives of crime victims also indicate that they tend to evaluate at least the VSO positively, regardless of the statements’ perceived lack of impact on the outcome.     

Korean citizen participation in criminal trials: The present situation and problems

As citizen participation in criminal trials was first introduced in 2008, it is advisable to keep the present form of an all-citizen jury system rather than introduce or adopt aspects of the Continental mixed tribunal system because the former system makes the best use of the meaning of Article 1 of the Act of Citizen Participation in Criminal Trials in Korea. Though previously professional judges participated in the deliberation process, under the current system, the new procedure should allow only jurors to engage in deliberations and render verdicts, with sentencing still left to professional judges. The new law should also eliminate a consent agreement required for a defendant in jury trial, thereby making jury trial mandatory for certain classes of heinous crimes like murder or even political crimes; juvenile cases, however, may still be excluded from jury trial. In addition, the exclusion right of the court should also be recognized, but the current comprehensive rule (Article 9 (1) (3)) should be eliminated. It is necessary for the jury verdict to have legal binding force such that the prosecutor cannot appeal the acquittal if the verdict was decided unanimously. Lastly, as for the use of victim participation programs, it is enough to simply allow victims to make statements as witness. This year, on March 6, 2013, the revised system of civil participation in criminal trials has been ready based on the evaluation of the current system by the Committee on Civil Judicial Participation, which was comprised of members from the judiciary, the academia, and civil organizations. The new amendment will be submitted to the National Assembly within this year.     

Citizen participation on regulatory boards

This article examines the relationship between regulatory board function and citizen participation. The research indicates that public members generally prefer advisory boards, while provider members prefer quasi-judicial bodies. Implications of these findings for structuring citizen participation in the regulatory process are examined.     

Face-work in Chinese routine criminal trials

This article examines the performative aspect of face-to-face interactions among various legal actors and defendants in routine criminal trials in China. Using 105 trial videos as empirical data, the author develops a face-work framework to understand how an individual judge's “face”—signifying judges' legal and political roles, and their professional status—is established, protected, and enhanced during courtroom interactions. The study shows that the legal face of judges can be established by some characterizations of the nature of criminal trials such as the demarcation of legal space, the speed of the trial, and the apprising of rights to the defendants. Nevertheless, the legal face can also be disrupted by trial interactions due to judges' lack of judicial authority. Hence, Chinese judges maintain their authority through the establishment of their political face. They also use both their political face and legal face to establish their situational professional status. These interactions often lead to punitive and coercive measures against defendants in trials. While the article focuses on routine criminal trials in China, the face-work framework has the potential to explain courtroom interactions in other types of social contexts and legal proceedings.     

Increasing jurors' participation in trials

A field experiment is reported that examines the advantages and disadvantages of two juror participation procedures: Allowing jurors to take notes during the trial, and allowing jurors to direct questions to witnesses. The presence or absence of both procedures was randomly assigned to 34 civil and 33 criminal trials in Wisconsin circuit courts. Following the trials, questinnaires were administered to judges, lawyers, and jurors. Overall, no evidence is found to support the hypotheses that juror notetaking would serve as a useful memory aid, would assist the jury with recall of the judge's instructions, or would increase the jurors' confidence in their verdict. The hypothesis that juror notetaking would increase juror satisfaction with the trial was supported. None of the findings supported the conclusion that juror notetaking was distracting, that notetakers were overly influential during the deliberations, that the jurors' notes were inaccurate, that the notes favored the plaintiff, or that the notes heightened juror disagreement about the trial evidence. It was hypothesized, but not found, that allowing juror questions of witnesses would uncover important issues in the trial and would increase the jurors' satisfaction with the trial procedure. However, juror questions did serve to alleviate juror doubts about the trial testimony, and provided the lawyers with feedback about the jurors' perception of the trial. No evidence was found to support the expectations that juror questions would slow the trial, would upset the lawyers' strategy, or that the question-asking procedure would be a nuisance to the courtroom staff. Furthermore, the lawyers did not appear overly reluctant to object to inappropriate questions from jurors, and jurors did not report being embarassed or angry when their questions were objected to.Dispute Resolution Research Center, Northwestern University     

Citizen crime prevention: Domains and participation

Attempts to engender citizens' participation in crime-prevention activities have met with varied degrees of success. Indeed, studies find great differences in participants. Part of the reason may be that different types of crime prevention are considered in the various programs and analyses. The present study uses the National Crime Survey: Victims Risk Supplement to uncover different domains of crime prevention activity and to investigate who participates in crime prevention. Five distinct types of crime-preventive behavior are isolated in the analysis. Further, path analytic techniques reveal that different demographic and crime related factors influence participation in the various crime-prevention activities. These results suggest that participation in crime prevention is complex and that we need more knowledge about who participates in different crime-prevention programs in order to promote such participation more effectively.     

The use of DNA statistics in criminal trials

In a number of recent cases in the UK, convictions have been quashed by the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the jury had been misdirected as to the factual significance of random occurrence statistics. The mathematical basis on which those statistics are calculated was reviewed and recent appeal cases involving DNA evidence in the UK and the US were examined. It was found that a widespread misconception exists regarding the random occurrence ratio and its relationship with probability of guilt. It is in fact impossible to relate the two with any degree of accuracy without consideration of social and demographic factors particular to a case as well as any non-DNA evidence obtained.     

Citizen assessment of local criminal courts: Does fairness matter?

Public opinion about local court systems is an important area of scholarly inquiry that has received little empirical attention. This study utilized a survey implemented by the National Center for State Courts to examine the effect of perceptions of fairness (egalitarian and discriminatory) on respondent satisfaction with local court handling of criminal cases (violent criminal, drug, and juvenile delinquency). Findings from OLS regression analyses indicated that perception of both egalitarian and discriminatory fairness had an impact on respondent reported satisfaction with local court handling of criminal cases. The results of the analyses also suggested that instrumental concerns, in the context of perceptions that courts resolve cases in a timely manner, had a significant impact on public assessment of local criminal courts. By contrast, prior experiences with local courts and respondent demographic factors had little direct influence on respondent satisfaction with local criminal court handling of cases. Direction for future research and implications of the findings are discussed.     

Popular legal participation in China and Japan

The purpose of this paper is to examine two contrasting styles of the mixed-court system in China and Japan and investigate the extent of their civic legal participation in both nations. In 2004, Japan passed the Quasi-Jury Act to introduce a system of popular legal participation in criminal trials, where defendants have their guilt and sentence determined by a judicial panel of both professional and lay judges. In the same year, the Standing Committee of the Chinese People’s Congress also promulgated the Resolution about the Improvement of the Lay Assessor System in 2004 (the Lay Assessor Act in 2004²) to revise the system of popular participation in law. The act was designed to correct the defects of the lay assessor system that have been sharply criticized by the Western observers for their lack of institutional effectiveness, minimizing the use of lay assessors, pointing at lay assessors’ participatory incompetence and passivity, and disapproving of insufficient funding, among others.There has been, however, little study critically examining the effectiveness of the revised system under the Lay Assessor Act in 2004 in China. In Japan, the first ever quasi-jury trial began in August 2009, but its quasi-jury system suffered from a lack of publicity and insufficient public knowledge about the system, thereby creating the wide-spread public reluctance, or even strong resistance, to participate in the system.The present research is an attempt to shed both theoretical and empirical light on the effectiveness of popular legal participation in these two powerful jurisdictions in East Asia. As both nations are working to adopt a democratic system of popular legal adjudication, this study will provide important clues to measuring the nations’ commitment, as well as the success or failure of the respective governments’ efforts, to democratize their systems of popular participation in legal decision-making.     

The effects of stealing thunder in criminal and civil trials

The effectiveness of a persuasion technique referred to asstealing thunder was assessed in two simulated jury trials. Stealing thunder is defined as revealing negative information about oneself (or, in a legal setting, one's client) before it is revealed or elicited by another person. In Study 1, 257 college students read or heard one of three versions of a criminal assault trial in which a damaging piece of evidence about the defendant was absent (no thunder), brought up by the prosecutor (thunder), or brought up by the defense attorney and repeated by the prosecutor (stolen thunder). In Study 2, 148 college students heard a civil negligence trial in which damaging evidence about the key plaintiff's witness was absent (no thunder), brought up by the defendant's attorney (thunder), or brought up by the witness himself (stolen thunder). In both studies, stealing thunder significantly reduced the impact of the negative information. A path analysis of the processes underlying the effect suggested that verdicts were affected because of enhanced credibility.Often a difficult decision in opening statements is whether, and if so how, to volunteer weaknesses. This involves determining your weaknesses and predicting whether your opponent intends to use them at trial. There is obviously no point in volunteering a weakness that would never be raised at trial. Where, however, that weakness is apparent and known to the opponent, you should volunteer it. If you don't, your opponent will, with twice the impact. (Mauet, 1992, pp. 47–48)We would like to thank Michelle Cox, Gim Koay, Dana Koay, and Ralph Mueller for their helpful input. Thanks also to Irv Horowitz and Steve Karau for their comments on earlier drafts.     

Italian criminal trials: Lost in transition? Differing degrees of criminal justice convergence in Italy and Australia

The Italian Code of Criminal Procedure underwent extraordinary reform in 1988, from an established inquisitorial system to incorporate key elements of adversarialism. This reform sought to create greater separation of powers and efficiency of the trial system. Two decades on, Italian criminal trials continue to be overly protracted, and struggle with maintaining independence of the judiciary (particularly a distinct separation from the prosecutorial arm). This paper primarily examines the philosophical foundations of inquisitorial and adversarial systems, and theories of the policy making process. It develops a theoretical framework for understanding the transformation of the Italian trial system, and the challenges that have resulted from combining two divergent approaches to criminal justice. Various important lessons are drawn for criminal justice community, as many jurisdictions are engaging in similar convergence of these systems as a result of global influence and change.     

Mock trials: A participatory views of the criminal justice process

“The whole art of teaching is only the art of awakening the natural curiosity of young minds for the purpose of satisfying it afterwards.” (France, 1881) This quote from The Crime of Sylvester Bonnard, the first novel of the Nobel Prize Winner, Anatole France, emphasizes a primary goal of teaching: awakening and satisfying natural curiosity. While most educators might agree with France’s assessment of educational goals, there seems to be less consensus on how this goal can best be achieved. Just as teachers differ so do teaching strategies. Obviously a variety of strategies can and should be utilized to attain the goal of facilitating learning by students. One of the proven instructional methods which can be utilized is simulation. It offers the opportunity for effective instruction at all levels of education from primary grades through professional schools. In criminal justice education, the use of simulation can provide students with an exciting opportunity to experience “real world” situations in the classrooms. It offers a chance for students to satisfy their natural curiosity through role play. This article describes the development and implementation of a mock trial course at Jacksonville State University.     

The effect of jury nullification instruction on verdicts and jury functioning in criminal trials

Jury nullification is a mechanism, and a defense, which allows the jury, as representatives of the community, to disregard both the law and the evidence and acquit defendants who have violated the letter, but not the spirit of the law. Should juries simply follow the law as articulated by the trial judge, or should they act as “conscience of the community,” and neglect the strict requirements of the law when it would lead to unjust or inequitable verdicts? The present study was aimed at providing empirical data for the following question: will the jury operate in a manner which is different than its normal functioning if given explicit nullification instructions? Three nullification instructins varying in explicitness as to nullification were combined with three criminal cases to yield a 3×3 factorial design. Forty-five six-person juries (270 subjects), were randomly assigned to the nine experimental groups. The results showed that juries given explicit nullification instructtions were more likely to vote guilty in a drunk driving case, but less likely to do so in a euthanasia case. The third case, which dealt with murder, did not show any differences due to instructions. Juries in receipt of nullification instructions spent less deliberation time on the evidence and more on defendant characteristics, attributions, and personal experiences.     

Lessons learned from the implementation of two randomized trials in a criminal court setting

Randomized trials represent the most rigorous type of research design to measure the impact of a social policy intervention. However, such designs are difficult to implement and require the consent of multiple parties, including researchers and non-researchers. Unique challenges arise when seeking to implement such a design in a criminal court setting, due to the need to revise legal procedures, uphold due process for defendants, and obtain the direct, ongoing participation of judges and attorneys, among other stakeholders. The current principals recently conducted two randomized trials concerning the court response to intimate partner violence: one testing the impact of court-ordered batterer programs in the Bronx, New York, and a second testing the impact of intensive judicial monitoring in Rochester, New York. Key lessons involved forging collaborative stakeholder relationships, critically assessing the experimental intervention and its contrast with the control condition, ensuring legal due process for defendants, addressing victim safety, setting realistic timetables, adopting a skeptical view towards estimates of study volume, and anticipating substantial variation from original design to final plan, especially in regards to randomization protocols and defendant eligibility criteria. These lessons may prove invaluable in informing future research in court-based and other social settings where random assignment is pursued.