Lecture 6: Juries

The Psychology of Juries

• The concept of jury trials originated in ancient Egypt 4000 years ago and was later developed in Athens, where jurors were selected by lottery.
• The idea of trial by jury spread across Europe and was introduced into Britain by the Normans.

Background: Australia

• In Australia, rules for juries vary by state, and jurors must be citizens, at least 18 years old, and not have a criminal record within the past 10 years.
• Certain professionals, such as senators, judges, MPs, clergy, barristers, solicitors, medical practitioners, and police officers, are exempt from jury duty.

Jury Selection

• Demographic variables do not consistently predict juror verdicts.
• Evidence is a more potent determinant of juror verdicts than individual characteristics.
• When evidence is ambiguous, juror personalities and general attitudes have an effect.
• Scientific jury selection involves drawing correlations between demographics and trial-relevant attitudes.
• Consultants conduct surveys in the jury population, and if a prospective juror fits an unfavorable profile, a peremptory challenge is used to exclude them.

Studying Jury Behaviour

• Four methods to study jury behavior: post-trial interviews, archival records, simulation techniques, and field studies.
• Post-trial interviews are limited by social desirability of responses and inaccurate recall.
• Archival records are limited by inability to establish cause and effect.
• Simulation techniques are limited by questionable generalisability to real-life cases.
• Field studies are limited by difficulties in obtaining permission from the courts and inability to control variables.

Reaching a Verdict

• The stages involved in reaching a jury verdict are: listening to the evidence, disregarding inadmissible evidence, judge's instructions, juror decision-making, deliberations, and the final verdict.
• Two aids have been proposed for jurors: note-taking and asking questions.
• Note-taking may help jurors by increasing memory and understanding of the evidence.
• Asking questions can promote clearer understanding, but does not help get to the truth.

Jury Deliberation

• Leniency bias: the tendency for jury deliberation to produce a tilt towards acquittal.
• Group Polarisation: when individuals tend to become more extreme in their initial position following group discussion.
• Minority Influence: not overly likely in jury situations, but a minority that favours acquittal stands a better chance than one that favours conviction.
• Black-sheep effect: similarity between defendant and mock jurors predicts leniency, except where evidence against defendant is very strong.

Arguments Against Juries

• Juries do not guarantee a fair trial.
• Juries are not always representative of the community.
• Juries do not give reasons for their decisions.
• Juries can be unpredictable and irrational.
• Jury trials often result in mistrials or hung juries.
• Juries are expensive and slow.
• Juries sometimes do not understand or remember evidence.

Arguments For Juries

• Juries provide an important civic responsibility and jurors feel a sense of responsibility.
• The decision of a group of peers is more acceptable to the defendant than the decision of one non-representative judge.
• Each jury brings a "fresh eye" to the case.
• Jurors possess "common sense".
• Juries, unlike judges, can deviate from the letter of the law if they feel it is appropriate to do so.