Juries

Question 1

The right to a fair trial

Answer 1

Enshrined in the Charter Section 7 and 11(d)

Question 2

The right to a trial by jury

Answer 2

In criminal cases involving indictable offenses - defined by Charter Section 11(f)

-Where the max punishment for the offence is imprisonment for 5 yrs or more severe punishment

Question 3

Jury Selection: the process

Answer 3

Juror impaneling process in Canada (s.631)

1. Each juror’s name and address written on a card.
2. Cards given to the Sheriff.
3. Sheriff mixes up cards and gives them to the clerk of the court.
4. Clerk draws the cards out randomly until a sufficient number have been drawn to provide a full jury after allowing for challenges.
5. Each member of the panel is sworn.

Question 4

Challenge for cause

Answer 4

638. (1) A prosecutor or an accused is entitled to any number of challenges on the ground that:
     (a) the name of a juror does not appear on the panel…;
     (b) a juror is not indifferent between the Queen and the accused;
     (c) a juror has been convicted of an offence for which he was sentenced to death or to a term of imprisonment exceeding 12 months;
     (d) a juror is an alien;
     (e) a juror is physically unable to perform properly the duties of a juror; or
     (f) a juror does not speak the official language of Canada that is the language of the accused …

Question 5

2 types of challenges to reject juror

Answer 5

Challenge for cause:
If concern about biased jury pool
-May be able to ask a few Q’s of potential jurors
Re: opinions and attitudes
Fellow jurors make judgment of partiality

Peremptory challenge:
CCC S. 634
Don’t have to give a reason

Question 6

Jury functions

Answer 6

Charter is meaningless without

Impartiality: jurors who are unbiased

Representativeness: Jury that is a composition that represents the community where the crime occured

Question 7

Keeping jurors impartial

Answer 7

Change of venue: move a trial to a community other than the one in which the crime occurred
Adjournment: Delaying the trial
Challenge for cause: reject biased jurors

Others:
Oath, Warnings

Question 8

Assumptions about Jury Capabilities

Answer 8

Jurors follow judicial instructions

Jurors can suspend judgment

Jurors do not succumb to group pressure

Tabula Rasa

Evidentiary focus

Question 9

Jury Nullification

Answer 9

Occurs when a jury ignores the law and renders a verdict based on other criteria

Question 10

Judges instructions: proposed reforms

Answer 10

4 suggested reforms:
Rewriting instructions
Providing written instructions
Pre- and post-evidence instructions
Lawyer clarification

Question 11

Tabula Rasa

Answer 11

Assumption:
Jurors enter trials as a passive “blank slate,” without biases, preconceived notions about the outcome of the trial, etc.

Reality: Every individual is influenced to some extent by his or her attitudes, beliefs, and especially experiences

Question 12

Evidentiary Focus

Answer 12

Assumption:
Jurors are able to base their decision solely upon the evidence presented during trial
Reality: Pre-trial publicity, extra-legal factors, inadmissible evidence–all can influence decision making

Question 13

How we Study Jurors/Jury Behaviour

Answer 13

Archival records: External validity is high but difficult to pinpoint cause-and-effect relationships

Simulation techniques: high internal validity and ability to pinpoint cause-and-effect relationships

Field studies: High external validity

Post-trial interviews: high external validity

Question 14

Rationales for Jury Secrecy:

Answer 14

1. Protecting the finality of verdicts
2. Protecting freedom of debate in the deliberation room
3. Protecting jurors from harassment
4. Protection of public confidence in the jury system

Question 15

deliberation

Answer 15

When jury members discuss the (admissible) evidence to reach a verdict, based on their understanding of the evidence, that is then provided to the court

Question 16

Inadmissible Evidence

Answer 16

During trials, lawyers or witnesses may make inadmissible statements

Juries instructed to disregard, but…
Unwilling/unable to set aside information that appears relevant regardless of law (Devine et al., 2001)

Instruction actually makes it MORE memorable (Paglia & Schuller, 1998)
-Backfire effect

Question 17

Decision-Making Models

Answer 17

Explanatory

Mathematical

Question 18

Mathematical Models

Answer 18

Assumes jurors conduct a set of mental calculations regarding:

1. importance of evidence
2. strength of the evidence presented (Hastie, 1993)

Verdict = calculation of all relevant evidence
*Research indicates jurors do not put a value to each piece of evidence (Ellsworth & Mauro, 1998)
Therefore, may be inconsistent with how juries actually make decisions

Question 19

Explanatory Models

Answer 19

Suggests evidence is organized into a coherent whole
E.g., Story Model
Involves imposing a story structure to the evidence
Choose verdict that is most consistent with story they have created
Research indicates this is more consistent with how jurors make their decisions (Pennington & Hastie, 1988)

Question 20

Decision-making phenomena associated with deliberation:

Answer 20

Polarization:
When individuals tend to become more extreme in their initial position following a group discussion

Leniency Bias:
When jurors move toward greater leniency during deliberations

Question 21

Predicting Verdicts: variables studied list

Answer 21

Demographic
Personality traits
Attitudes
Defendant characteristics
Victim characteristics
Expert Testimony

Question 22

Demographic Variables

Answer 22

Gender, rase, socioeconomic status, and education are examined
Where found, effects are small and/or moderated by other variables
E.g., jury instructions, participant demographics, strength of evidence

Question 23

Similarity Bias:

Answer 23

More lenient on persons more ‘like’ ourselves

More punitive towards persons less ‘like’ ourselves

Question 24

Racial Bias & Black sheep effect

Answer 24

Racial Bias:
Disparate treatment of racial out-groups;
Black sheep effect
Strong evidence + similarity = punitiveness
Weak evidence + similarity = leniency

Question 25

Personality Traits

& THE BIG 5

Answer 25

2 personality commonly studied: (pro prosecution bias)
Authoritarianism
Dogmatism

Big 5:
Extroversion
-Most persuasive
Agreeableness
-Conscientiousness
-More likely to be persuaded by other jurors
Emotional Stability
Openness to Experience
Least likely to be persuaded

Question 26

Attitudes and jurors

Answer 26

Variety of general attitudes studied:
Rape
Drunk driving
Child sexual abuse
Capital punishment

In general, no group attitudes/values shows clear bias

Question 27

Defendant Characteristics that influence verdict

Answer 27

Defendant characteristics that influence verdict are:
Criminal history :
-Evidence regarding prior criminal record more likely to convict

Attractiveness of the defendant:
More attractive defendant less likely to convict
May not apply if deliberations present

Socioeconomic Status (SES)
-Similarity bias

Question 28

Victim Characteristics in verdict influence

Answer 28

Similarity Bias

Victim characteristics more relevant in sexual assault cases
-Sexual intercourse in past year, jurors more likely to doubt victim’s credibility and find her blameworthy (Schuller & Hastings, 2002).

Question 29

rape shield laws

Answer 29

enacted in 1985

Protect victims from being questioned about sexual history
In 1992, laws amended allowing trial judge to decide if sexual history relevant
In 2000, Supreme Court ruled that onus is on defendant to show sexual history relevant (R. v. Darrach, 2000)

Question 30

Judges vs. Juries

Answer 30

Judge trial may be less formal:
E.g., may not insist on strict adherence to courtroom procedural rules and rules of evidence

Can reasonably expect judge to ignore inflammatory, irrelevant, or other inadmissible evidence

• BUT still subject to same biases
• AND jury may be more sympathetic than a judge

Lawyer folk wisdom to choose:
Jury if a case has emotional appeal
Judge if a case is complex and based on technical legal questions