Chapter 9 and 12: Juries Flashcards
Fifth Amendment
Outlines Grand Juries: Guarantees grand jury indictment for capital or infamous crimes
6th Amendment
Provides the right to a speedy and public criminal trial by an impartial jury
7th Amendment
Ensures jury trials in most civil cases where value exceeded 20 dollars
Criteria to serve on a jury
-18 years old
-Speak English
-Mentally competent
-Have no felony convictions
-Citizen
1950s Chicago Jury Project
Illegally taped jury deliberations led to laws banning recordings in 30+ jurisdictions
Mathematical Models of Jury Decision Making
Jurors assess each piece of evidence and mentally calculate a probability of guilt
Explanation Based Models
Jurors build cognitive narratives of the case using heuristics and systematic analysis
Story Model
Jurors build a coherent story of the crime
Evidence Strength
Strong evidence = more consistent decisions
Liberation Hypothesis
When evidence is weak, jurors use extra-legal factors like race or attractiveness
Race effects in sentencing
-More likely to give death penalty in cases involving minorities who killed white victims
Pretrial Publicitity
-Media coverage of case biases jury toward prosecution
-When emotions are involved it becomes a real problem
Solutions to PTP
Delays and change of venue
Inadmissible evidence effect
Telling Jurors to disregard evidence can backfire due to ironic processes
Ironic Processes
Attempting to suppress thoughts makes them more likely to surface
Psychological Reactance
People resist constraints on freedom which increases focus on forbidden info
Complex Evidence
When evidence is technical, jurors rely on expert credentials
An effective expert testimony should be:
Clear, slow, and repetitive
Deliberation Phases
- Orientation
- Open Conflict
- Reconciliation
Verdict v. Evidence Driven styles
Verdict-Driven: Vote first then discuss to change opinion of minority
Evidence-Driven: Discuss first (better option)
Normative v. Informational influence
Informational: Using others as a source of information
(Conform based on what others say)
Affects private and public beliefs
Normative: Conform to gain approval
Changes public behavior without affecting private beliefs
Ballew v. Georgia
6 person juries allowed but not 5
Larger juries are much better
Ramos v. Louisiana
Required unanimous verdicts in all criminal cases
Hung Jury
Occurs when no unanimous verdict is reached
Dynamite/Allen Charge
Judges urges minority jurors to reconsider views, potentially coercive
Jury Nullification
Jurors disregard law/evidence to reach a personal moral verdict (less harsh on sympathetic defendants)
Jury Intrusctions- Gacy v. Welborn
Appeal based on idea that instructions are unclear, did not work
Overall jury instructions are around 50% but with rewording can be improved to 80%
Hesitancy to reword
-Fear of appeals
-Many instructions and who writes them?
-More concerned with accuracy than comprehension
Improvements in Instructions
Pre-Instructions and flow charts
Judges v. Juries: Bias
Both are equally susceptible to inadmissible evidence and personal bias
Judges v. Juries: Accuracy
High agreement rates: judges aren’t necessarily better with technical info
