Jury Decision Making 1

Question 1

What is the adversarial system?

Answer 1

Prosecution vs defence
Jury not involved in the investigation, preparation or collection of evidence
Give a true verdict according to the evidence

Question 2

What is a civil case?

Answer 2

Lower standard of proof

Question 3

What is a criminal case?

Answer 3

Proof beyond reasonable doubt

Question 4

What are the levels of proof?

Answer 4

No evidence 
Scintilla 
Reasonable suspicion 
Probable cause 
Preponderance 
Clear and convincing 
Reasonable doubt 

Have to have all to be guilty

Question 5

What is scintilla?

Answer 5

Any evidence at all. Even the smallest

Question 6

What is reasonable suspicion?

Answer 6

Should be based on specific or particular facts or reasons. Not based on a hunch or guess

Question 7

What is probable cause?

Answer 7

Reasonable and trustworthy information that a particular person has committed a particular crime.

Question 8

What is preponderance?

Answer 8

The greater weight or amount of evidence

Question 9

What is clear and convincing?

Answer 9

A firm belief that the allegations are true

Question 10

What are the types of court?

Answer 10

Magistrates court

Crown court

Question 11

What is the magistrates court?

Answer 11

Hear all criminal cases at first instances.
Serious cases transferred to the crown court.
Less serious cases and juveniles are tries at magistrates courts.

Question 12

What is the crown court?

Answer 12

Dealing with indictable criminal cases that are transferred from the magistrates courts.

Serious criminal cases (murder, rape, robbery, drug trafficking…)
Appeals against the decisions made by magistrates courts
Heard by judge and jury
Jury decides if guilty or not guilty
Judge imposes a sentence if guilty.

Question 13

Types of offences?

Answer 13

Summary
Either-way
Indictable-only

Question 14

What are summary offenses?

Answer 14

Less serious cases

Magistrates court

Question 15

What are either-way offences?

Answer 15

Cases which can be heard either in a magistrates court or before a judge and jury in the crown court.

Question 16

What are indictable offences?

Answer 16

Serious cases which have to go to the crown court.

Question 17

What’s a jury in waiting?

Answer 17

20 or more

Random selection of 12 individuals

Question 18

How many jurors during trial?

Answer 18

Minimum of 9

Question 19

How do juries work?

Answer 19

Push for unanimous decision

Deliberate for minimum of 2 hours and 10 minutes before majority decision is accepted.

Question 20

What juror majorities are allowed?

Answer 20

11-1
10-2
10-1
9-1

If only 9 jurors, decision must be unanimous.

Question 21

What are hung juries?

Answer 21

No decision - not majority/unanimous

Usually lead to re-trials

Question 22

What’s a re-trial?

Answer 22

Defendant tried again by a different jury.

If prosecution chooses to proceed for a second time

If jury unable to agree again, conventionally there is no third trial

Prosecution to offer no evidence = not guilty

Question 23

What’s double-jeopardy?

Answer 23

Law exists in the UK
Has been reformed in the 2003 act
Now allows re-trails for a number of very serious offences
Where new and compelling evidence has come to light.

Question 24

What are the advantages of research with real juries?

Answer 24

Archival research (verdicts from court records)
Field studies (self-report surveys after trial, views of other ppts).   

Real reaction (validity)
Ecological 
Generalisable 
Natural setting 
Hawthorne effect 
Will debate in more depth - more seriously

Question 25

What are the disadvantages of research with real juries?

Answer 25

Little to no experimental control Difficult to interpret Can’t see deliberation Personal biases Ethical issues Hard to replicate the study

Question 26

What are the advantages of research with mock juries?

Answer 26

Prevalent empirical methodology High degree of experimental control, easier to draw conclusions Able to observe discussion Repeatability

Question 27

What are the disadvantages of research with mock juries?

Answer 27

Artificial, lacks external validity Unrealistic - no consequences, little pressure Low generalisability Hawthorne effect

Question 28

Wiener, Krauss and Lieberman (2011) issues with jury research?

Answer 28

Some issues with the validity of mock jury research Suggest that studies should use different samples so they don’t place too much emphasis on student samples. Focus on replication of results as well

Question 29

Bernstein et al., (2017) issues with jury research?

Answer 29

Alleviate concerns regarding the use of student samples in jury stimulation research Found that guilty verdicts, culpability ratings, and damage awards did not vary with samples.

Question 30

Jury eligibility?

Answer 30

18-76 Understand English Ordinarily residents in UK for minimum of 5 years Not mentally disordered Not disqualified (on bail; imprisonment last 10 years). Can’t know someone involved in case Have to understand proceedings No procedure for balance - race, gender, age etc Random selection (no scientific selection or voir dire) Standard DBS check - more if concerns about bias

Question 31

How can you challenge jurors?

Answer 31

Prosecution asks a juror to stand by Challenge for cause (pros or def) Judges discretionary power

Question 32

When can ‘stand by’ happen?

Answer 32

Only if unsuitable or following advance background check

Question 33

What is challenge for cause?

Answer 33

Ground of bias - hostility or connected to one side

Question 34

How does jury selection work in USA?

Answer 34

Objectified to gain advantage - not make process fair Work out how beliefs and attitudes of each juror will favour one side over the other. Attitude surveys and scales.

Question 35

What is challenge for cause (USA)?

Answer 35

Lawyer typically claiming that juror will be biased or have specialist knowledge (e.g. physician + medical malpractice)

Question 36

What is peremptory challenge (USA)?

Answer 36

If challenge for cause refused Lawyer can dismiss the juror without cause or approval Limited number allowed

Question 37

What is voir dire (UK)?

Answer 37

Trial within a trial Determine the admissibility of evidence Or the competency of a witness or juror

Question 38

What is voir dire (USA)?

Answer 38

Prospective jurors are questioned about their backgrounds and biases before being chosen to sit on a jury.

Question 39

Case of OJ Simpson?

Answer 39

``` Prosecution wanted white jurors, defence wanted black jurors. P believed (wrongly) women would judge more harshly (domestic abuse). D team hired jury consultant. P dismissed theirs on day 2 & disregarded his advice & didn’t use all challenges. ``` Defence opinion - data predicted black American women least likely to convict. Presumption black Americans would be receptive to view that corrupt racist police officers planted evidence Prosecution ignored this and relied on OJs history of wife-beating - also favoured black women. ``` 8 black women 1 black man 1 Latino man 2 white women 5 thought physical force sometimes justified 2 college education 5 negative experience of police 9 thought unlikely guilty because good footballer ``` Trial lasted 8 months Deliberation 4 hours Consultants found that black women took a dislike to the prosecutor referring to her as a castrating bitch. Well-educated jurors might have been more likely to truth DNA evidence. Not guilt on all charges

Question 40

What are jury responsibilities?

Answer 40

Responsible for deciding, based on facts of case, if guilty or not of the offence charged with. Must reach verdict by considering only evidence introduced in court and the directions of the judge. Will be taken into the jury room and allowed no outside communication at all, with the exception of notes to the court registrar.

Question 41

What is meant by jury comprehension?

Answer 41

How much they understand Law terminology is technical and culturally bound. - can lead to misunderstandings by juries - trial complexity is a problem for jurors - difficulty in understanding Wagstaff et al (2007) complex cases require more cognitive work Heuer and Penrod (1995) more info = less confident jurors became in verdict

Question 42

Jury comprehension models?

Answer 42

Story model Common sense justice model Transportation imagery model

Question 43

What is the story model?

Answer 43

Pennington and Hastie (1991) Active, constructive comprehension Information moulded into a story Different jurors may construct different stories, and arrive at different verdicts.

Question 44

Principles of the story model?

Answer 44

Coverage - accounts for evidence presented Coherence - consistent, plausible and complete Uniqueness

Question 45

What is the common sense justice model?

Answer 45

Finkel and groscup (1997) People have different conceptualisations of the law Discrepancies between the law and common sense (common sense normally wins) E.g. previous experience, stereotypes can bias jurors

Question 46

What is the transportation imagery model?

Answer 46

Green and brock (2000) Empathy for protagonists. Vivid mental imagery Disconnect from physical world Feel absorbed in the narrative Story consistent beliefs Greater story acceptance