Judge highlights what the jury must do in this particular case- reach unanimous verdict, nominate a jury foreman, go through evidence (does not always happen)
Video of Jury - In beginning, they argue until they establish order and begin going through the points/pieces of evidence, brings in point the detective is the same person who was one of first at scene - is that a flaw? Autopsy says she fought back, had stab wounds, why/how did defendant have not a drop of blood? jury begins to go more in depth and discuss multiple aspects of the case
Jury Instructions and Comprehension
Judges give jury instructions about the standard of proof required for a verdict, this is supposed to help jury reach correct verdict
Onus of proof - used in Australia
What is the possibility the verdict is not guilty?
Burden of proof- Up to prosecution to prove defendant is guilty, recognizing defendant does not have to prove they are evidence
Beyond reasonable doubt - means you can have some doubt, but the doubts are not reasonable
McCabe and Purves 1974 - ask shadow juries about their experiences (second jury sits in publice gallery for research so their deliberations can be recorded)
Stephenson 1992 - consciousness made fade away
Zander and Henderson in 1993 study found 90% of the 8000 jurors were able to understand and remember the evidence, this relied on jurors self reporting
Jackson 1992 - 25% understand most of instructions, 65% all, might not be very reliable of actual comprehension because it is self reported
In 1979 Charrow and Charrow developed test where jurors are asked to paraphrase what the judicial instructions mean, better idea of how much they could comprehend
1992 report showed only 41% of jurors were able to comprehend and write the instructions
showed they have serious difficulty comprehending differences between legal concepts
Show they have poor recall of trial information, especially more complicated cases
Heur and Penrod 1994, as amount of information increased, harder to decide the case
Video of Jury - In beginning, they argue until they establish order and begin going through the points/pieces of evidence, brings in point the detective is the same person who was one of first at scene - is that a flaw? Autopsy says she fought back, had stab wounds, why/how did defendant have not a drop of blood? jury begins to go more in depth and discuss multiple aspects of the case
Jury Instructions and Comprehension
Judges give jury instructions about the standard of proof required for a verdict, this is supposed to help jury reach correct verdict
Onus of proof - used in Australia
What is the possibility the verdict is not guilty?
Burden of proof- Up to prosecution to prove defendant is guilty, recognizing defendant does not have to prove they are evidence
Beyond reasonable doubt - means you can have some doubt, but the doubts are not reasonable
McCabe and Purves 1974 - ask shadow juries about their experiences (second jury sits in publice gallery for research so their deliberations can be recorded)
Stephenson 1992 - consciousness made fade away
Zander and Henderson in 1993 study found 90% of the 8000 jurors were able to understand and remember the evidence, this relied on jurors self reporting
Jackson 1992 - 25% understand most of instructions, 65% all, might not be very reliable of actual comprehension because it is self reported
In 1979 Charrow and Charrow developed test where jurors are asked to paraphrase what the judicial instructions mean, better idea of how much they could comprehend
1992 report showed only 41% of jurors were able to comprehend and write the instructions
showed they have serious difficulty comprehending differences between legal concepts
Show they have poor recall of trial information, especially more complicated cases
Heur and Penrod 1994, as amount of information increased, harder to decide the case
Comments
Post a Comment