Juries Flashcards
(85 cards)
1
Q
True or False: In Canada, Jurors are never allowed to take notes
A
False, this is up to the judges discretion
2
Q
What kind of offence does a defendant not have a right to a jury?
A
Summary Offence
3
Q
How do we establish cause and effect in jury research?
A
Simulation Studies
4
Q
Jurors believe that although the individual broke the law, they do not believe that the said law reflects the law/moral reasoning
A
Jury Nullification
5
Q
True or false: There are both positive and negative influences on juror decision-making from pretrial publicity
A
True
6
Q
What is it called when they decide to move a trial?
A
Change of Venue
7
Q
What are the two fundamental attributes of a juror in Canada?
A
Impartiality and Negative Influence
8
Q
What psychological construct has been shown to reduce racial bias in juror decision-making?
A
Race Salience
9
Q
True or false: In both Canada and the US, jury must be unanimous or will be considered hung
A
False (Some states only need the majority)
Canada - must be unanimous
10
Q
Jurors who are more supportive of ___________ tend to find guilty verdicts more often
A
Capital punishment
11
Q
What are the three types of offences?
A
Summary
Indictable
Hybrid
12
Q
What is a summary offence?
A
- Less serious
- Tried in lower court
- Judge alone
- Typically < 6 months
- Fine of $2000
13
Q
Examples of summary offences
A
Disturbing the peace
Solicitation of prostitution
Assault
14
Q
What is an indictable Offence?
A
- Three categories
- Heard by judge alone (less serious)
- Must be heard by judge & jury
- Treason, murder, piracy - Accused can choose
- Arson, SA w/ a weapon
15
Q
What is a hybrid offence?
A
- Cross between summary and indictable
- Crown attorney decides
- SA, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle
if summary –> Judge only
If indict. –> Accused decides
16
Q
How large are juries in Canada?
A
12 people + two extras
CAN legally function with ten
Varies in US
17
Q
Who are jurors and why?
A
Members of the community
Community decisions have greater legitimacy and public acceptance than lone judge
18
Q
What does the juries act concern?
A
Provincial/territorial legislation
Criteria and selection process
19
Q
Two stages of the Jury Selection Process
A
Out-of-court process (ie. mailed to you)
In court process
20
Q
Out of court process: Jury list
A
- randomly selected from electoral tolls
- 18+
- Resident of the jurisdiction where crime was committed
- No unpardoned indictable offences
- Exclusion criteria (Differs by province)
21
Q
Ontario exclusion criteria for jurors
A
Police officers
Lawyers
employee of the attorney general
22
Q
what does the In-court part of the jury selection process include?
A
- Summons
- Venire
- Lawyers can challenge
23
Q
Summons
A
- Legal notice to appear at courthouse at particular time/date
- DOES NOT mean you have been selected
- Between 11-21% fail to show in ON
- 20% in the US
24
Q
Venire
A
- Group of prospective jurors
- Size depends on case/where tried
i.e 473 for Robert Pickton: Difficult to try and get people who have not heard of him yet
25
Who may the judge dismiss?
- Those who are of exclusionary criteria
- Those with health issues
- Those with relationships to the case
26
What are the two types of challenges for lawyers?
Peremptory challenge (Do not have anymore)
Challenge for cause
27
What is it called when a juror is chosen?
Whey are considered "called forward"
28
Peremptory Challenge
- Automatic
- no reason given
- Limited number
- Give perception of fairness
- recently eliminated in Canada
29
What eliminated the peremptory challenge?
Bill C-75 (2018)
30
R. v. Stanley
- Gerald stanley
- Charged with second degree murder of Colten Boushie (22 year old cree pheasant indigenous man)
- Defence used peremptory challenges to strike all prospective indigenous jurors
- All-white jury aquitted stanley
31
What did the R.V Stanley case determine?
That racial composition of the Jury matters
No longer use peremptory challenges
32
Challenge for a cause
- Challenge a juror's impartiality
- Presumed to be impartial
- Defence must establish "realistic potential" for partiality
- Judge asks them questions and decides
33
Recent Change in Challenge for a cause
Used to be a juror asking another juror if they are impartial/making the decision, now it is the judge that asks questions/decides
34
Jury Selection: US vs. Canada
- Stark contrast
- US has more extensive/intrusive questions
- In Canada they may know your name, address, sometimes occupation
- Majority in Canada chosen without being questioned
35
What lead to the determination of the Characteristics/Responsibilities of the Canadian Jury?
- Supreme Court of Canada
- R v. Sherrat
36
Explain Representativeness
Jury's composition represents wherever the trial takes place
"One's Peers"
37
Explain Impartiality
Lack of bias on the part of jurors
38
Problems with Representativeness
- Randomness - Debated
- Jury likely never fully representative of a community
- Crown/defence may challenge composition of jury panelist
- Indigenous underrepresentation
39
Explain the problem with jury randomness
- Often selected by telephone or voting registry
Is this really random?
- many do not vote, or do not have access to a phone
40
Why is the jury not likely fully representative of a community?
- Small sample size
- One person is not the entirety of a particular constituency
41
R v. Nepoose
Jury panel was successfully challenged for having too few women
42
Cultural reasons for indigenous underrepresentation in juries
- Judgement of others
(Reintroduction of restorative justice programs)
- Re-victimization
43
structural barriers contributing to Indigenous Underrepresentation in Juries
- Limited courthouses
- Costly and time-consuming for transportation
- Summons written in english/french
44
3 Requirements of Impartiality
1. Set aside preexisting biases, judge solely on admissible evidence
2. Ignore information not part of admissable evidence
3. No connection to defendant/trial
45
Inadmissable evidence
- Lawyer raises objection (two options)
- Although now inadmissable, cannot "un-ring a bell", the jurors who heard it may still be influenced by it
46
Two options when a lawyer raises an objection to evidence
overrule --> Judge allows the statement/evidence
Sustained --> Tell jury to disregard the statement/evidence
47
When inadmissible evidence is presented at trial, verdicts ___________ with that evidence are more likely
Consistent
48
Judicial instructions to ignore/limit the use of inadmissible information appears to be ______________.
Ineffective
49
In some cases, judge's instruction backfires and _____________ the impact of the informationn (inadmissable evidence)
Accentuate
50
Why does inadmissible evidence still influence jurors?
- Ironic processes
- Reactance theory
51
Ironic processes
- When you try not to think of something, often dominates our thoughts
- Particularly when mental capacity is taxed
52
Reactance theory
- people like freedom
- Judges instruction is threat to freedom
- react by paying attention to it
53
Preliminary Inquiry : Media
Media almost always forbidden from reporting
54
Tori Stafford: Media
- Publication ban to prevent media from reporting about terri-lynne and her confession
- Still lots of media attention
- Often information considered to be inadmissible (character, hearsay)
55
Media often tends to be pro-prosecutor/Anti-defendant. Why?
Many media outlets get their information from police and prosecutors
56
Excessive news coverage = More likely to ______________.
Presume guilt
57
Jurors may misremember information from media as....
Being part of the evidence they heard in trial
58
Remedies for Impartiality
1. Adjournment
- reduce salience/impact of information
2. Change of venue
- Paul Bernardo --> St. Catherines to TO
3. Challenge for cause --> jury selection
- Juror is suspected of being bias
59
Issues to identifying impartial jurors
1. May occur in open course
- Alter answers afteer seeing what people say to get in/out of court
2. Social Desirability
- Afraid to indicate bias
3. Unaware of bias
- Implicit biases
60
How do we study juries?
Simulations/Experiments (Mostly this one)
Post-trial interviews
Archival studies
Field Studies
61
Jury Simulations
- Mock jurors
- Presented with manipulated trait stimulus
- Render verdict
- respond to additional measures
62
Problems with Simulations/experimental studies on jurorsq
- Lack consequentiality
- Length of trial/deliberation
- Trial stimulus (read/video is different from sitting in a courtroom
- Often undergrads
- Often individual verdicts -- Missing deliberation
63
Jury Decision-Making Models/Theories
Mathematical Models
Story Model
Director's Cut Model
64
Mathematical Model of jury decision making
Weight of evidence, mental calculations
Verdict determined by calculations
Assign equation
65
Story model of Jury decision-making
Jurors create stories about what happened based on evidence
Select verdict that best fits their story
66
Director's cut model of jury decision-making
Pre-existing attitudes/beliefs/schemas affect our stories
67
Strongest predictor of trial outcomes
Strength of evidence
68
Liberation hypothesis
Most trials are determined by strength of evidence
Ambiguous trials are liberated from the law
Allow influence of prejudice/extra-legal factors
69
Extra-Legal Factors
- Variables/factors that influence jurors but shouldn't
- Not legally relevant
- Race, gender, socioeconomic status, attractiveness, personality
70
Similiarity-Leniency
Jurors are typically more lenient towards own-race defendants
71
Social Identity Theory
- Self-esteem directly influenced by group membership, perception of ingroups
- We like it when people think our ingroup is good
- Discriminate against outgroup
72
Black Sheep Effect
- Race of defendant (black or white)
- strength of evidence (Strong or weak)
- Told participants they would be deliberating in groups
Weak evidence --> jurors less harsh towards ingroup
Strong evidence --> Jurors harsher toward ingroup
73
What drives the black-sheep effect?
- Believe they are deliberating after
- Unlikable/deviant ingroup member is threatening to positive group image
- Derogated more than an equally unlikeable individuals who poses no threat
74
Victim Race
- Jurors are more punitive when the victim is white
- Societal value: white lives are more valuable
Exception: Jurors are more likely to convict officer when defendant is black vs white
75
Victim Race in Canada - Study
- Officer charged w/ manslaughter
- Audio-recorded, witness photographs
- 2 conditions, Victim race: white or indigenous
- Talk about evidence very differently --> justify their behaviour
76
Verdict by race: Indigenous victim
More choose not guilty
77
Verdict by race: White victim
More choose guilty
78
Strong Prosecutors effect
Jurors are "wrongfully aquitting" when DNA evidence they expect isn't there
Expect reliable, available DNA
79
Trial of Robert Blake
- Movie star, married bonnie lee bakely
- Bonnie shot and killed outside of restaurant
- Windows down --> must've known the person
- No witness/forensic evidence
"Couldn't put the gun in his hand"
Prosecutor says jurors were incredibly stupid
80
What does the trial of Robert Blake Suggest?
That the strong prosecutors effect is real
81
Studying the CSI effect: Meta-analysis of TV-show
- Found DNA more than 90% of the time they searched
- all analysis in house, by lone technician
- almost 90% result in a match
82
Studying the CSI effect: Viewers and decision-making
- Measure amount of time watching CSI drama
- Viewers or non-viewers
- Trial transcript
- Verdict, reason for verdict
- No difference between groups in verdict or reasoning
83
CSI effect: Viewers andd decision making: Results explained
- Frequency may not = perceived realism
- Lots binge shows, know its unrealistic
84
Perceived realism and CSI-effect
- Measured both frequency and perceived realism
- Prosecution --? DNA, fingerprint, or eyewitness
Results
- Jurors higher in perceived realism are more likely to convict (all evidence types), regardless if evidence or not
- No evidence that perceived realism is related to expectations about DNA evidence
- No support for CSI effect
85
