Trial consultants is using psychologists, experts, scientist’s attorneys and criminal aids to assist during the trial process. The key is to gain an understanding of what you believe the jury will decide on a case based on “acquittal” or “guilt” of a crime. Times are changing in that; a lot of trials are not making it past jury selections. Many parties are settling their differences through arbitration so the use of jury consultants have seen a decline over the years (Shapiro, 2005). Another technique now used is “shadow jury lite” or “trial monitoring” where you would have a consultant and up to six jury eligible candidates evaluated the daily proceedings. Their feedback is used to adjust the strategy in which the witnesses or line of questions …show more content…
The process was very slow and brutal. It was a lot of waiting and I remember most of the candidates did not want to participate. Most of us was getting paid a lot less than our regular paying jobs, so the money was horrible, and the cases were usually boring. Not too many high-profile cases that would keep your attention. So, everyone would dread the job we all were forced to do. Thinking back, there was always one guy in the room that wanted the position and took the position seriously while the other ten or eleven of us could care less. You always had one who never followed the rules, checking their phones constantly, and always slept during the proceedings. Oh, and the part about not discussing it outside the room, was that really a rule? There was always going to be one who did not hear that rule either. Now it is up to the consultant to whine out the jurors who are the violators. They must look at each one of the selected and determine who can be trusted to provide them with the information that they need to get the outcome they are looking for to win this trial. For me that is much more interesting than the trial itself. Now you are getting into the behaviors of the individuals and the nonverbal and understanding what is not being said
This chapter is mainly devoted to the jury selection process and how it is taken care
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.
Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then separating them into smaller groups to be seated in the jury box. The judge and or attorneys ask questions with intent to determine if any juror is biased or cannot deal with the issues fairly. The question process is referred to as voir dire, a French word meaning, “to see to speak”. During voir dire, attorneys have the right to excuse a juror in peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are based on the potential juror admitting bias, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, personal knowledge of the facts, or the attorney believing he/she might not be impartial. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky, James Batson, a black man, was indicted for second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the selection of the jury the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike out all of the four black potential jurors, leaving an all white jury. Batson’s attorney moved to discharge the venire, the list from which jurors may be selected, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges violated his client’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury derived from a “cross-section of the community”(People v. Wheeler, 583 P.3d 748 [Calif. 1978]). The circuit court ruled in favor of the prosecutor and convicted Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court.
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. 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, as instructed by the judge of the court, was for the jury to identify if the death penalty should be used.... ...
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
In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.
There was a great deal of drama surrounding the selection. On the first day, about 50 percent of 200 potential jurors were excused due to personal hardship. On day 2 of jury selection the judge dismissed over 20 people for discussing their opinion of the case while seated in a private room. On the fourth day of jury selection, a male juror was dismissed and fined for attempting to discuss the case with news reporters. During the selection process, many other jurors were dismissed for displaying alarming behavior related to the
They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair
Now that we have discussed the pretrial occurrences, we get into the trial portion of the court process. This is the portion of the process in which both the defense and the prosecution present their cases to the jury, the judge, and the rest of the courtroom. To select a jury, the bring in potential jurors and ask them questions,
The jury system is essentially a descendant of Great Britain, the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians. Colonialism played a significant role in the development of the jury system globally. However, despite colonial influence, judicial systems across the world have taken their own way. As a result, the jury system has developed and changed to suit the needs and social conscience of different countries. Across the world, juries examine and decide the facts in a jury trial, the accuracy of the testimony, the guilt or innocence of criminal defendants, and liabilities in a civil litigation. Today, many countries such as Britain, United States, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Australia, France, German, India, and so on practice jury trials. These countries will be the issue of discussion in this paper.
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.
Key aspects of the preparation stage, as defined by Budjac Corvette and utilized by juror 8, include preparation occurring prior to the negotiation meeting, research, and determining negotiation tactic and style. Throughout the jury deliberation, juror 8 disclosed information
They are getting paid to sit there but we don’t know if they even are pay attention. In doc E, cartoon 1 it shows a picture of a jury and it shows what they all are thinking and the majority was thinking abou the trail but a handful were not thinking about it. Then they go back to vote and just say something because they didn’t even pay attention to the trail the whole time. They just sit there at act like they are listening. Why have them there and pay them if you don’t know if they are paying attention? Seems like a waste of money, time, and space. Also in doc D it shows what people think abou the trail and their opinions, one jury member is Angela and her only quote was “i can’t believe it, i’m shocked, oh my god. I can’t believe it.” this makes her seem like she wasn’t even paying that much attention because they other all have a lot to say about it and what they