| Abstract: | This study applied the theory of communicative competence in analyzing the juror's decision-making structure. The primary thrusts of this study were 1) to ascertain whether or not presuppositions or value laden data affect a juror's decision-making process and 2) to uncover common sense ground during a court trial. Findings indicated that an imbalance existed between interpretations of both hard and soft data. This study questions the distorted system of communication and suggests methods of improving quality through reaching mutual consensus. The theory applied in this study was grounded in a culture of rational discourse. Finally, it was found that the manner in which the prosecution and defense construct their lines of questioning influences the juror's decision-making process. |
