Jurors' consideration of inadmissible evidence: A motivational explanation

Procedural justice research suggests that, as decision makers in a trial, jurors may be unwilling to disregard inadmissible evidence if they believe it will lead to a just outcome. In an experimental study, three hypotheses were tested: participants reading trial evidence while assuming the role of a juror (rather than observer) would report stronger motivations to protect the community; motivations to protect the community would be associated with higher conviction rates; and participants would be more likely to follow judicial instructions to disregard inadmissible evidence when they assumed an observer (rather than juror) role. Findings indicated that participants were more likely to convict the defendant when they experienced higher motivations to protect the community, reinforcing the importance of studying juror motivations. However, results revealed a complex pattern of factors affecting juror motivations as well as verdict decisions. Results are discussed in terms of the effectiveness of the curative instruction, and key directions for future research.

The American juror: being a guide for jurymen throughout the United States. Containing rules for testing the credibility of witnesses and weighing and estimating evidence, together with a system of forensic reasoning for jurors.

Mode of access: Internet.

The triumph of virtue : the trial of Miss Mary Ann Tocker, who plead her own cause, for an alleged libel on R. Gurney, Jun. ... to which is prefixed a letter to Miss Tocker, and to which is added an address to jury-men on their duties as jurors, and especially on trials for criminal libel /

"From the third New-York edition."

A brief treatise on prisons; intended for the use of sheriffs, magistrates, grand jurors, and other persons, interested in the construction and management of prisons. Illustrated with an enlarged design of the new gaol about to be erected at Dover.

Mode of access: Internet.

The law, without the advice of an attorney. Or, Every man his own counsellor. Containing the laws of Pennsylvania relative to bonds, promissory notes, deeds, mortgages, judgments, limitation of actions, leases by parol, property exempt from distress and levy, register and recorder, witnesses, jurors, and constables fees, education of poor children, interest, landlord and tenant, constables, innkeepers, livery stable keepers, mechanics' lien, stage drivers, carters, inland navigation, roads, bridges, fences, strays, swine, water courses, hunting &c. Together with a number of forms and other legal information useful to the farmer, mechanic, or man of business.

Mode of access: Internet.

Jurors' responses to expert witness testimony: The effects of gender stereotypes

The present study investigated whether the impact of expert testimony was influenced by the congruency between the gender of the expert and the gender orientation of the case. Participants (N = 62) read a trial transcript involving a price-fixing allegation in either a male or female oriented domain. Within the case, the gender of the expert was manipulated. As predicted, the impact of the expert (e.g. damage awards) was greater when the gender of the expert and domain of the case were congruent as opposed to incongruent. Results also indicated that the impact of gender-domain congruency was particularly pronounced following group discussion. In addition, there was evidence that this effect was mediated through participants' evaluations of the expert witness.

Jurors' use of social framework evidence

Monahan and Walker (1988) delineated three uses of social science evidence within the courts: social authority, social fact, and social framework. Social authority evidence is social science evidence used in making policy or law. Social fact evidence is social science evidence that describes research undertaken expressly for the case at hand. Social framework evidence involves providing conclusions from previously conducted social science research to assist jurors in evaluating the other evidence in the case. Although this type of evidence has traditionally been presented via expert testimony, Monahan and Walker (1988) have suggested that, because the social science research involved comes from the extant literature and is not the province of any particular expert, it would be more economical to have the judge present this information as part of the judicial instructions to the jury. This study tested the implicit assumption that the presentation of the social framework evidence by the judge will have the same impact on juror verdicts as presentation of this evidence by an expert. ^ Two hundred mock jurors watched a videotaped hostile work environment sexual harassment trial. The social framework evidence consisted of the discussion of factors that have been found to increase the likelihood of sex stereotyping of women by men. The trial included either no social framework evidence, social framework evidence presented by the expert, or social framework evidence presented in judicial instructions. ^ Results indicated that men who heard the social framework evidence from the judge were more likely to vote for the defendant than men who heard no social framework evidence. Men who heard the judicial instruction with the social framework evidence also rated the plaintiff as less credible than the other men and women in the study. Thus, it appears that, for men, social framework evidence presented by the judge harms the plaintiff's case by reducing ratings of her credibility, but the same evidence presented by an expert does not affect men's verdicts. For women, however, social framework evidence, irrespective of who presents it, enhances the plaintiff's case. ^

Predicting jurors' decisions: The effects of repeated expression and forewarning in civil voir dire

To help lawyers uncover jurors' attitudes and predict verdict, litigation experts recommend that attorneys encourage jurors to repeatedly express their attitudes during voir dire. While social cognitive literature has established that repeated expression of attitudes increases accessibility and behavior predictability, the persuasive twist on the method exercised in trials deserves empirical investigation. Only one study has examined the use of repeated expression within a legal context with the results finding that the tactic increased accessibility, but did not influence the attitude verdict relationship. This dissertation reexamines the ability of civil attitudes to predict verdict in a civil trial and investigates the use of repeated expression as a persuasive tactic utilized by both parties (Plaintiff and Defense) within a civil voir dire in an attempt to increase attitudinal strength, via accessibility, and change attitudes to better predict verdict. This project also explores potential moderators, repetition by the opposing party and the use of a forewarning, to determine their ability to counter the effects of repeated expression on attitudes and verdict.^ This dissertation project asked subjects to take on the role of jurors in a civil case. During the voir dire questioning session, the number of times the participants were solicited to express their attitudes towards litigation crisis by both parties was manipulated (one vs. five). Also manipulated was the inclusion of a forewarning statement from the plaintiff, within which mock jurors were cautioned about the repeated tactics that the defense may use to influence their attitudes. Subsequently, participants engaged in a response latency task which measured the accessibility of their attitudes towards various case-related issues. After reading a vignette of a fictitious personal injury case, participants rendered verdict decisions and responded to an attitude evaluation scale. Exploratory factor analyses, Probit regressions, and path analyses were used to analyze the data. Results indicated that the act of repeated expression influenced both the accessibility and value of litigation crisis attitudes thus increasing the attitude-verdict relationship, but only when only one party engaged in it. Furthermore, the forewarning manipulation did moderate the effect of repeated expression on attitude change and verdict, supporting our hypothesis.^

Australian Media Law [5th Edition]

Australian Media Law details and explains the complex case law, legislation and regulations governing media practice in areas as diverse as journalism, advertising, multimedia and broadcasting. It examines the issues affecting traditional forms of media such as television, radio, film and newspapers as well as for recent forms such as the internet, online forums and digital technology, in a clear and accessible format. New additions to the fifth edition include: - the implications of new anti-terrorism legislation for journalists; - developments in privacy law, including Law Reform recommendations for a statutory cause of action to protect personal privacy in Australia and the expanding privacy jurisprudence in the United Kingdom and New Zealand; - liability for defamation of internet search engines and service providers; - the High Court decision in Roadshow v iiNet and the position of internet service providers in relation to copyright infringement via their services; - new suppression order regimes; - statutory reforms providing journalists with a rebuttable presumption of non-disclosure when called upon to reveal their sources in a court of law; - recent developments regarding whether journalists can use electronic devices to collect and disseminate information about court proceedings; - contempt committed by jurors via social media; and an examination of recent decisions on defamation, confidentiality, vilification, copyright and contempt.

Distributed belief revision as applied within a descriptive model of jury deliberations

Belief revision is a well-research topic within AI. We argue that the new model of distributed belief revision as discussed here is suitable for general modelling of judicial decision making, along with extant approach as known from jury research. The new approach to belief revision is of general interest, whenever attitudes to information are to be simulated within a multi-agent environment with agents holding local beliefs yet by interaction with, and influencing, other agents who are deliberating collectively. In the approach proposed, it's the entire group of agents, not an external supervisor, who integrate the different opinions. This is achieved through an election mechanism, The principle of "priority to the incoming information" as known from AI models of belief revision are problematic, when applied to factfinding by a jury. The present approach incorporates a computable model for local belief revision, such that a principle of recoverability is adopted. By this principle, any previously held belief must belong to the current cognitive state if consistent with it. For the purposes of jury simulation such a model calls for refinement. Yet we claim, it constitutes a valid basis for an open system where other AI functionalities (or outer stiumuli) could attempt to handle other aspects of the deliberation which are more specifi to legal narrative, to argumentation in court, and then to the debate among the jurors.

Belief revision as applied within a descriptive model of jury deliberations

Belief revision is a well-researched topic within Artificial Intelligence (AI). We argue that the new model of belief revision as discussed here is suitable for general modelling of judicial decision making, along with the extant approach as known from jury research. The new approach to belief revision is of general interest, whenever attitudes to information are to be simulated within a multi-agent environment with agents holding local beliefs yet by interacting with, and influencing, other agents who are deliberating collectively. The principle of 'priority to the incoming information', as known from AI models of belief revision, is problematic when applied to factfinding by a jury. The present approach incorporates a computable model for local belief revision, such that a principle of recoverability is adopted. By this principle, any previously held belief must belong to the current cognitive state if consistent with it. For the purposes of jury simulation such a model calls for refinement. Yet, we claim, it constitutes a valid basis for an open system where other AI functionalities (or outer stimuli) could attempt to handle other aspects of the deliberation which are more specific to legal narratives, to argumentation in court, and then to the debate among the jurors.

Media coverage outside the courtroom : public opinion of restrictions imposed on news journalists and psychological effects on crime victims

Comme les études sur la couverture médiatique ont démontré qu’elle influence pratiquement toute personne qu’elle touche, des consommateurs aux jurés aux témoins, les deux études de cette thèse doctorale ont respectivement examiné l’opinion du public sur l’imposition de restrictions sur les médias dans les palais des justices et l’impact de la couverture médiatique sur la santé mentale des victimes de crime. Le gouvernement québécois a récemment introduit des restrictions sur les médias dans les palais de justice afin de minimiser l’influence des journalistes et des caméramans. Bien que l’affaire a atteint la Cour suprême du Canada, une étude préliminaire a trouvé que le public est largement favorable à ces restrictions (Sabourin, 2006). La première partie de cette thèse doctorale cherchait à approfondir ce sujet avec un échantillon plus représentatif de la population. Deux cent quarante-trois participants comprenant six groupes expérimentaux ont rempli des questionnaires mesurant leur opinion de ces restrictions. Les participants ont été divisé en deux conditions expérimentales où ils ont visionné soit des clips audiovisuels démontrant une atmosphère de débordement dans des palais de justice ou des clips plutôt calmes. Un troisième groupe n’a visionné aucun clip audiovisuel. De plus, il y avait deux versions du questionnaire ayant 20 items où les questions ont été présenté en sens inverse. L’étude a trouvé qu’une grande majorité des participants, soit presque 79 pourcent, ont supporté la restriction des médias dans les palais de justice. Il est intéressant de noter qu’un des groupes n’a pas supporté les restrictions – le groupe contrôle qui a lu les énoncés supportant l’absence des restrictions en premier. La deuxième composante de cette thèse doctorale a examiné l’impact des médias sur les victimes de crime. De nombreuses études expérimentales ont démontré que les victimes de crime sont particulièrement susceptibles à des problèmes de santé mentale. En effet, elles ont trois fois plus de chances de développer un trouble de stress post-traumatique (TSPT) que la population générale. Une étude a confirmé cette conclusion et a trouvé que les victimes de crimes qui avaient une impression plutôt négative de leur couverture médiatique avaient les taux les plus élévés de TSPT (Maercker & Mehr, 2006). Dans l’étude actuelle, vingt-trois victimes de crimes ont été interviewé en utilisant une technique narrative et ont complété deux questionnaires mésurant leur symptômes du TSPT et d’anxiété, respectivement. Une grande proportion des participantes avaient des symptômes de santé mentale et des scores élévés sur une échelle évaluant les symptômes du TSPT. La majorité des narratives des participants étaient négatives. Les thèmes les plus communs incluent dans ces narratives étaient l’autoculpabilisation et une méfiance des autres. La couverture médiatique ne semblaient pas être liée à des symptômes de santé mentale, quoique des facteurs individuels pourraient expliquer pourquoi certains participants ont été favorables envers leur couverture médiatique et d’autres ne l’été pas. Les résultats de ces deux études suggèrent que le public approuve la restriction des médias dans les palais de justice et que des facteurs individuels pourraient expliqués comment la couverture médiatique affecte les victimes de crime. Ces résultats ajoutent à la littérature qui questionne les pratiques actuelles qu’utilisent les médias.