Jurors’ decisions are affected by emotions and other unspoken thoughts/feelings. Previous research has shown that people make decisions on “quick gut feelings.” The goal of this study is to see if a disgusting stimulus will have an influence on juror decision-making. The research was concerned with the decision-making question of whether or not jurors’ disgust and gut-feeling judgment towards the defendant are key elements in legal settings. This decision will be due to a “quick gut feeling” of disgust either attributed or not attributed to the criminal (Schnall, Haidt, Clore & Jordan, 2008). Haidt (1997) suggested that facial expressions used to reject physically disgusting things are also used to reject certain kinds of socially …show more content…
More than any other emotion, disgust feels like a “gut” feeling and because of its link to nausea, disgust may be the most effective emotion at triggering the gastro-enteric nervous system. Schnall, Haidt, Clore, & Jordan (2008) performed four studies involving four different ways of inducing disgust and found a causal relationship between feelings of disgust and moral condemnation. Like previous research, this study showed that there is a relationship between disgust and moral judgment. Moral judgment and reasoning are important for the evaluations people make about a situation in certain cultures. Feelings of disgust cause individuals to make harsher decisions even if the decision has nothing to do with what originally disgusted them. Disgust is thought to have an effect on decision-making. Disgust and decision making has been researched as how disgust affects moral decisions (Schnall, Haidt, Clore, & Jordan, 2008). These studies indicate that disgust associated with the defendant can affect one’s judgment of the person’s character. Jones and Fitness (2008) showed that people who were exposed to descriptions of criminal behavior displayed feelings of disgust. These findings suggest that disgust is associated with criminal behavior whether associated with the criminal or not. Behaviors that are seen as degrading, defiling, or
Serving on a jury is a civic duty and an American tradition. However, some people view jury duty as a chore or as an event that negatively interrupts their lives. Some independent studies have shown that even jury duty has a devastating effect on married life. Due to this and other extraneous situations, there are only a few people who actually want to serve on a jury. This may lead to efforts by potential jurors to, in some way get out of their duty in a jury. What we know of as the current jury duty system should be changed so citizens are not forced to serve in this capacity and can still be regarded as a responsible civilian. As per the status quo, a trial jury is a constitutional right, a jury of ones peers or equals. However,
Inside a room where life or death decisions are made, twelve men sit with wandering thoughts. The made up minds of some jurors are to send a boy to his death without a second thought, but one other juror may change that. Inside of the play Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose, Juror 8 has the persuasive evidence to change the minds of his fellow Jurors and save a boy from his execution. The other Juror’s seem like they won’t budge with their mind set on the decision of guilty, but after Juror 8 proves his thoughts on the decision of innocent, he may just be able to save a young life.
Every day people are convicted of crimes or arrested for other reasons. Once they are convicted they are summoned to court, this begins the jury process. Citizens are randomly chosen to serve on jury duty. The citizens on the jury will use the jury system to determine if the person being accused is guilty or innocent. Trials can become very long or they can be short it just depends on the topic and how long it takes to decide on what the consequences will be. The jury system is the main trial and the main decision of whether or not someone is right or wrong.
Juries in NSW The jury system plays a very important part in the running of the courts. The jury system is needed in both criminal and civil cases. There are advantages of the jury system as well as disadvantages.
Conflict between the US and Mexico began with Mexico's and Texas’s differences caused them to clash leaving to Texans’ war for independence from Mexico, which they gained in 1836. Texas then asked the US for annexation, which the US refuse the first two times, but them in 1845 the US annexed Texas. After the annexation of Texas Mexico and the United States had different perspectives, leading to the border dispute where US-Mexican troops fought, and hence that came to the US-Mexican war in 1845. This trial is meant to decide if America’s actions were honorable and justified, or if the United States used its power to manipulate Mexico. Based on all the evidence presented, the jury declared the US to be guilty on the charge of wrongfully provoking a war with Mexico.
Juries are a crucial and irreplaceable part of the American justice system. The jury system has been around for hundreds of years. Our founding fathers viewed jury service as a critical part of democracy and self government. Twelve ordinary citizens make up the jury and will form a decision about the case. The jury system is still needed in the twenty-first century because it ensures the accused gets a fair trial and it promotes civic participation.
Jury nullification is when a jury acquits a defendant who it believes is guilty of the crime he is charged (Hickey, 2010. p. 370). This is because the jury chose to ignore the facts of the case and the judge instructions, and based his or her decision on personal opinion. If we are going to allow jury nullification we may as well not take up the tax-payer’s money to even take it to trial. Nullification – The act of making a law null and void (nullifying). For example, during prohibition, many juries found defendants innocent, even when the state had proven its case, because they did not think the law should exist. State legislatures also have nullified federal laws within their borders, creating a nullification crisis for the federal
Juries exists in the criminal trial to listen to the case presented to them and, as a third, non-bias party, decide beyond reasonable doubt if the accused is guilty. For the use of a trial by juror to be effective, no bias should exists in the jurors judgments, the jurors should understand clearly their role and key legal terms, and the jury system should represent the communities standards and views whilst upholding the rights of the accused and society and remain cost and time effective.
In the movie 12 Angry Men, juror number 8 (Henry Fonda) was not sure if evidence presented...
The courthouse was crowded, all seats were taken and many were standing in the back. It was silent, no one spoke, not even a baby cried out. There was the Judge sitting in the front of the room, the defendant, the solicitor, and the jury. I was a member of the jury that day. Everyone knew the truth, the defendant was innocent, and the evidence that was established was supportive and clear. The jury’s decision however, was not based on evidence, but on race. A jury is supposed to put their beliefs aside and make a decision based on the information given during the trial. Jury members must do their duty and do what is right. I tried to do what was right, but all the other members of the jury were blind. They chose to convict because of skin
Personal prejudice and bias from the jurors affects their logical thinking and this is how Rose illustrates that truth can still be inhibited even with the use of reason. Juror 10 is depicted as one of the main antagonists throughout the play. His statement of how “they don’t need a big excuse to kill someone” when describing the boy and ‘his’ people demonstrates how Juror 10’s personal prejudice against those from the slums affects his reason and logic as he links their socioeconomic background with their behaviour. Rather than depicting the boy as an individual, Juror 10 generalises him with “those people” who are criminals which emphasises the boy’s guilt in the mind of Juror 10. In addition to Juror 10’s prejudice, Juror 3, who is the other
The Selection and Role of a Jury in a Criminal Trial This assignment focuses on how a jury is selected and its role in a
Critically analyzing stories based on the elements of fiction can give readers a more in-depth perspective on the authors true meaning to what is written. In Susan Glaspell's "A Jury of Her Peers", irony, theme, and plot and structure are applied well throughout. When analyzing this story, it can not be judged on how appealing or entertaining it is, but whether or not it fully achieves its central purpose and how significant that purpose is. In this story every element mentioned has worked together to bring this tale to life.
When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).
The process of learning criminal behavior by association with criminal and anticriminal patterns involves all of the mechanisms involved in any other learning process.