The effect of defendant gender on juror decision-making

Research investigating the role of stereotypes in jury decision-making has typically considered stereotypes as acting as peripheral cues in determin ing the credibility of experts or likelihood of guilt of defendants — with counter-stereotypic courtroom participants faring less well. The present study investigated the possibility that the extent to which courtroom participants are stereotypic can alter the mode of information processing. Students (N = 78) read a transcript of a case in which either a male or female allegedly committed an armed robbery. As predicted, the female counter-stereotypic defendant was distracting and effortful processing only occurred when the defendant was male. The male was seen as more guilty and the prosecution's case was more convincing when the prosecution had a strong, but not weak, case. There were no effects of case strength for the female defendant. Results are discussed in terms of the role of stereotypes in the jury decision-making.

The Hitch case - saving ampoules for a defendant from a chemical test for alcoholic intoxication. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Driver and Pedestrian Programs, Washington, D.C.

Minerals Separation, Ltd., et al., plaintiffs-petitioners, vs. Butte & Superior Mining Company, defendant-respondent. Brief for defendant-respondent. Thomas F. Sheridan [and others]

Cover-title.

In the Supreme Court of Illinois, Northern Grand Division, March term, A.D. 1887. August Spies et al., plaintiffs in error vs. the People of the State of Illinois, defendant in error, indictment for murder.

Mode of access: Internet.

State of Michigan, plaintiff, v. State of Wisconsin, defendant.

At head of title: In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1925. Original, no. 19, in equity.

Before an Arbitration Board ... Ralph Emerson Heilman, Chairman ... Franklin Association of Chicago, plaintiff vs. Franklin Union no. 4, defendant : closing argument for the defense by Mr. David J. Saposs ... closing argument for the plaintiff, by Mr. James Hibben ... the decision of the board.

Other documents on the same case are filed with this.

The unfit defendant in Illinois : the implications of Senate Bill 133 for all mental health professionals and those involved in the criminal justice system.

Mode of access: Internet.

[Opinion of the Supreme Court] of the state of New York, in a cause in which James Field was plaintiff and Charles Field defendant.

The lawsuit arose out of a dispute between the "orthodox" and "Hicksite" branches of the Society of Friends over the possession of a school fund.

Decision of the Court of chancery of the state of New Jersey, in a cause between Thomas L. Shotwell, complainant, and Joseph Hendrickson and Stacy Decow, defendants. Also the opinion of the Supreme court of the state of New York, in a cause in which James Field was plaintiff, and Charles Field, defendant.

Dispute concerning a school fund of the Society of Friends, which was claimed by both Orthodox and Hicksite factions.

The Troy & Boston railroad company vs. the Boston, Hoosac tunnel & western railway co. Answer. Prout & Walker, defendant's solicitors and counsel.

At head of title: Circuit court of the United States, district of Vermont. In equity.

In Equity no. 169. In the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of California : the Equitable Trust Company of New York, as Trustee, Complainant, against Western Pacific Railway Company, Chester L. Hovey, as Receiver of Boca and Loyalton Railroad Company, and Mercantile Trust Company of San Francisco, as Trustee, Defendants, and Central Trust Company of New York, as Trustee, Intervening Defendant and Cross-complainant.

[V.1.] Proceedings on Master's sale -- [v.2.] Decree of forclosure and sale -- [v.3.] Ancillary decree of foreclosure and sale.

The effects of defendant account on damage award decisions

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the manner in which civil defendants account for their behavior influences compensatory and punitive damage awards. Jurors read three civil trial summaries, in which I manipulated injury severity (high vs. low), defendant reprehensibility (high vs. low), defendant status (individual vs. corporate), and account (concession, excuse, justification or refusal) in a factorial design. I also included four control groups in which the defendant stipulated liability. In all other conditions, participants read that a jury had found the defendant negligent. Only defendant reprehensibility influenced punitive awards. Both plaintiff injury and defendant reprehensibility influenced compensatory awards. When individuals offered justifications and when corporations offered excuses, jurors awarded lower compensatory awards against low reprehensibility defendants than against high reprehensibility defendants. Negligence stipulations led to lower damage awards for individuals than for corporations. Additionally, concessions tended to produce lower awards when combined with a stipulation of negligence as opposed to a jury decision. These findings support the hypothesis that in cases in which the defendant is clearly negligent, circumstances exist in which stipulating negligence and offering an apologetic account will lead to reduced damage awards decisions. Results indicate that individual and corporate defendants offering justifications and refusals should first consider the reprehensibility of their actions. In a broader realm, findings demonstrate that the manner in which a jury perceives the explanation given by the defendant is dependent upon defendant characteristics and case-specific factors. ^

Anotação, numa perspectiva de Direito Penal e de Criminologia, de alguns dos aspectos do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (português), de 28 de Setembro de 2011 - os problemas do direito ao silêncio e do dever em o arguido se sujeitar a aplicações de prova no processo penal

Resumo: 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 28 de Setembro de 2011; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 28 de Setembro de 2011, Juiz Conselheiro Raul BORGES (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Armindo MONTEIRO cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 20 de Janeiro de 2012; 3 – Anotação; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação; 3.2 – Algumas das referências, por parte do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 28 de Setembro de 2011, aos problemas do direito ao silêncio e do dever em o arguido se sujeitar a aplicações de prova no processo penal; 3.3 – «Teoria geral» dos problemas do direito ao silêncio em contraste com o dever de sujeição do arguido a diligências de prova no contexto do direito processual penal lusitano; 4 - Conclusão. § Abstract: 1 - Summary of the Judgement of the Supreme Court of Justice of 28 September 2011 2 - Full text of the Judgement of the Supreme Court of Justice of 28 September 2011, Councillor Judge Raul Borges (Reporter), Councillor Judge Armindo Monteiro cf. . http://www.dgsi.pt, January 20, 2012, 3 - Note: 3.1 - Introduction to the annotation; 3.2 - Some of the references, by the Judgement of the Supreme Court of Justice of 28 September 2011, the problems the right to silence and the duty in the defendant be subject to applications of proof in criminal proceedings; 3.3 - "general Theory" of the problems the right to silence in contrast to the duty of subjection of the accused to proof steps in the right context criminal procedure Lusitanian 4 - Conclusion. P.S.: este é o "abstract" tal qual como surge no artigo.

Prefácio

A tese de Mestrado com o título “A Proibição da Reformatio in Pejus: os efeitos processuais no direito processual penal e no direito das contraordenações”, é uma delas. Trata-se de tese com especial qualidade e muito útil ao leitor profissional e especializado das Ciências Jurídico-Criminais e portanto Constitucionais. Ou não fossem as garantias criminais o núcleo fundamental dos espaços e tempos de Direito, da democracia social: art. 32º/10 da Constituição da República Portuguesa: “10. Nos processos de contra-ordenação, bem como em quaisquer processos sancionatórios, são assegurados ao arguido os direitos de audiência e defesa.”; Abstract: The Master's thesis entitled "Prohibition of Reformatio in pejus: the legal proceedings in the criminal procedural law and the law relating to offenses", is one of them. It thesis with special quality and very useful to the professional and skilled reader of Legal and Criminal Sciences and therefore constitutional. Or were not criminal guarantees the fundamental core of the spaces and times of law, social democracy: art. 32/10 of the Portuguese Constitution: "10. In misdemeanor cases, as well as any disciplinary procedures, is guaranteed to the defendant the hearing and right of defense. ".