Dr. Jason Bull has quite the operation as he works for a firm called Trial Analysis Corporation. With the use of advanced technology, psychology and much more they sort out which team each juror in the courtroom will side with. After completing the piolet, I believe that I have been impressed on what Dr. Bull’s tasks are. The firm conducts mock trails in courtrooms to make them appear like real trails the firm is working with. There are cameras set up and they are analyzed to match up exactly with the real jury that's been selected for the case, down to their personal characteristics, likes/dislikes and behavior. Based on all this analysis, Bull is able to identify which of them will side with the prosecution and which will side with the defense.
This report is on a movie called, “12 Angry Men.” The movie is about 12 men that are the jury for a case where a young man is being accused of killing his father. A major conflict that is very obvious is the disagreement on whether the young boy was guilty or innocent. After court when all of the men sat down to begin their discussion Courtney B. Vance (#1) Took charge and respectfully was now the leader. He asked what everyone’s votes were and all of the men except for Jack Lemmon (#8) voted the young man was guilty. Because Jack was the odd one that chose differently than the rest of the men, all of the other Jures, were defensive about the evidence just because they were all so confused.
Michael “Meeko” Thompson has spent more than two decades locked away in the Chippewa Correctional Facility. Michael was arrested for selling three pounds of cannabis to an undercover officer. He had prior drug offenses, but no history of violence. When his house was raided after his arrest, a few antique firearms and one usable firearm were recovered. Despite the fact that the antiques did not fire and the one that did was owned by Michael’s wife, he was convicted of felony possession of a firearm along with his cannabis charges. This was his fourth offense which labeled him a habitual offender, and he was sentenced to 40-60 years in prison. He could have been sentenced to as little as five years. Notably, even the Michigan Supreme Court
Bull is what psychologists call an alpha male. Bull Meechem has a self-confidence problem he must constantly establish his dominance over his family. When Mary Anne tries to condone Bull on his loss instead of saying thank your or just ignoring her he tell her “ Get out of here before I start knocking every freckle off your face” This comment was obviously unnecessary and offend Mary Anne deeply. Another horrible side to Bull is his physical abuse to Lillian and the kids. Countless times Bull has struck either Lillian or the kids. Though Lillian denies it Ben reminds her and the reader that Bull has struck her in the past. “‘Your nose was bleeding and that’s how I ruined this T-shirt. I’ve kept it, Mama, because I wanted it as proof. This is your blood, Mama. Your blood’” “ ‘He never hit me’ Lillian insisted”. These tantrums by Bull only alienate his children and his wife from him but he can still obtain their utmost respect and discipline.
Smith, William (1997) “Useful or Just Plain Unfair? The Debate Over Peremptories; Lawyers, Judges Spllit Over the Value of Jury Selection Method” The Legal Intelligencer, April 23: pg 1.
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
In America, every individual has the right to a fair trial, but how fair is the trial? When an individual is on trial, his or her life is on the line, which is decided by twelve strangers. However, who is to say that these individuals take their role seriously and are going to think critically about the case? Unfortunately, there is no way to monitor the true intentions of these individuals and what they feel or believe. In the movie, Twelve Angry Men, out of the twelve jurors’ only one was willing to make a stance against the others, even though the evidence seemed plausible against the defendant. Nevertheless, the justice system is crucial; however, it is needs be reformed.
Yet with the help of one aged yet wise and optimistic man he speaks his opinion, one that starts to not change however open the minds of the other eleven men on the jury. By doing this the man puts out a visual picture by verbally expressing the facts discussed during the trial, he uses props from the room and other items the he himself brought with him during the course of the trial. Once expressed the gentleman essentially demonstrate that perhaps this young man on trial May or may not be guilty. Which goes to show the lack of research, and misused information that was used in the benefit of the prosecution. For example when a certain factor was brought upon the trail; that being timing, whether or not it took the neighbor 15 seconds to run from his chair all the way to the door. By proving this right or wrong this man Juror #4 put on a demonstration, but first he made sure his notes were correct with the other 11 jurors. After it was
The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.
Shelton, Hon. Donald E., Gregg Barak, and Kim S. Young. “A Study of Juror Expectations and
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
Otto, A. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1994). The Biasing Impact Of Pretrial Publicity On Juror Judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 18(4), 453-469.
Famous writer Robert Frost stated, “A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.” While selecting a competent lawyer is important, in the court of law, the process of jury selection is easily one of the most important factors. While many elements are considered during the process of jury selection, the most valuable is the use of psychology. Psychology is used by lawyers during the process of jury selection to choose the best possible jurors to decide the fate of their client. Psychology can be used in many different ways such as voir dire, persuasion, and research.
videotaping of a real life jury as seen in a small criminal courtroom. The case
With the help from the team of doctor the jury was able to come up with a verdict.
The quietness and patience juror 8 displayed caused tension amongst the other jurors creating careful and adequate (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p.453) deliberations. Juror 8 's circle of influence (Covey, 2013) directly influenced the other jurors’ circle of concern (Covey, 2013) when forcing them to question their thought process. Juror 8 chose a collaborative negotiation (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p. 63) method when deliberating with the other jurors immediately handing down guilty verdicts for the defendant. Furthermore, juror 8 used his ACES to help the other jurors cross the creek (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p.