Study Program Essay

In the past, the jury learned from the forensic scientists’ testimony; but now, they’re learning from television and a lot of reality shows. Consequently, what they’re learning is not necessarily what is actually done (Honeycutt). However, those jurors who watch criminal investigation television shows do believe that what they’re seeing on TV is what does go on in real life and they expect to see it in court. This is because, according to Shelton, “the more frequently jurors watched a given program, the more accurate they perceived it to be.”

eMock Trials are much like a traditional mock trial except that the jurors participate via the Internet. Because of the convenience and economies of scale of online participation, we can generate feedback from a larger panel of jurors. In turn, this provides feedback to the trial team normally associated with larger panel jury research, but at a lower cost.

This distorted perception leads jurors to believe that cases are supposed to be handled the same way they view it on

In the movie 12 Angry Men, the jurors are set in a hot jury room while they are trying to determine the verdict of a young man who is accused of committing a murder. The jurors all explain why they think the accused is guilty or not guilty. Throughout the movie they are debating back and forth and the reader begins to realize that even though the jurors should try to not let bias cloud their judgement, the majority of the jurors are blinded by bias. The viewer can also see that the jurors have their own distinguishable personalities. Their personalities intertwine with each other to demonstrate how the jury system is flawed, but that is what makes it work.

In order to comprehend the contribution of psychology to areas of criminal investigation it is important to evaluate research into two of the following areas of criminal investigation: eye witness testimony and offender profiling as well as assess the implications of the findings in the area of criminal investigation. In addition, this essay, with reference to relevant psychological research, discuss how the characteristics of the defendant may influence jury behaviour as well as analyse two psychological influences on the decision making process of juries. In order to improve the efficiency of detection and successful prosecution of crime it is important to underline that in a previous administration, detection of serious crime was poor and eyewitness testimony appeared very unreliable, partly due to standard interview techniques yielding confusing results. It is therefore this essays primary focus is to provide the chief constable with a report explaining how psychologists might be able to improve this situation with a full evaluation of process and evidence.

Trials do this in many ways, one way is by letting both sides speak. Whenever there is a problem the first thing that happens is that both sides of the problem have a story. Trials let both sides tell there story, therefore resolving the conflict. Trials also seek the truth to provide justice for the side that is “hurt.” The interface between science and law are so testy because science provides an answer and the law seems to always want to stretch the answer and bend the words. Law takes the science and tries to make it appear as the law wants. Science and law also have a testy interface because science continues to push the law to the limit. Expert witnesses are sages. They are sages because they tell the truth, the holy truth, and nothing but the truth. They provide the solution the problem and end the dispute. An expert witness can make or break a trial depending if you are prosecuting or defending. For a jury, the choice of experts or peers comes down to a few things. One of the things being the situation you are in and which way you want the jury to be persuaded toward. If it is a sad case, like this one, you would want peers that would have feelings and would feel bad and give the people more and help them. If you were trying to prove something you would want experts because they would feel less and be less affected by feelings. Citizens have a voice in government but the

Almost half the jurors expect to see some scientific evidence is astonishing. Breaking the survey down, by the type of crime, and the kind of evidence jurors wait to see is extraordinary. In murder cases over 70 percent of jurors expect some scientific evidence; whereas, in rape cases over 70 percent of the jurors expect some scientific evidence and DNA (Shelton, 2008). In burglary cases, over 70 percent of jurors wait for fingerprint evidence, cases involving firearms over 75 percent of jurors expect ballistics and over 65 percent of jurors wait to see fingerprint evidence (Shelton, 2008). Just looking at these percentage, any prosecutor or law enforcement officer would agree these numbers show the expectations of our citizens.

"The Andrea Yates case in Texas highlights the need for another option for jurors other than simply guilty or innocent. Often, juries are reluctant to find defendants 'not guilty by reason of mental illness,' because they are afraid those defendants will not be held responsible and will go free after only a brief stay in a psychiatric hospital," said Senator Padavan. "These

For instance, when Juror 4 said to everyone regarding about a baffling conflict, “I don't see any need for arguing like this. I think we ought to be able to behave like gentlemen." (16) This shows how Juror 4 is confident and determined to resolve the case and not play around. He tries very hard to calm many jurors down instead of letting it go and think of other things, this shows that he cares about the case. Moreover, Juror 8 also shows us that he cares about the case because he thinks and tries very hard to back up his claim so that is seems believable. To illustrate, when Juror 8 tries to retort back to a claim he thinks is false, “Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn't have to open his mouth. That's in the Constitution. The Fifth Amendment. You've heard of it." (18) This quote reveals how he is confident with his knowledge and tries very hard to think of a rebuttal against Juror 2 argument. He thinks that a rebuttal against a false statement is very important, because he doesn’t want Juror 2 to convince other people with his statement. In another example, Juror 8 exhibits how he takes the trial seriously by investigating the case in his own time, “I’m just saying it’s possible ... I got it last night in a little junk shop around the corner from the boy's house. It cost two dollars." (24). In his own time, Juror 8 tries to find a similar knife that has been used in the murder, and successful bought one. This shows how he is willing to sacrifice his own time to find evidence for the case, it shows that he cares about the case and take the trial seriously. By taking the trial seriously, it reveals how both of the jurors is a fair person and wanted to give a fair trial and justice to the

It is critical to understand why eyewitness testimony has such a great impact upon jurors’ choice of guilt because many innocent people have gone to jail due to eyewitness testimony. It is speculated that male and female jury members weigh guilt differently. This study hypothesizes there will be a measured difference between the independent factors, gender and type of eyewitness and the dependent variable, level of guilt. In this experiment the eyewitness type is: ‘no eyewitness,’ ‘unrefuted eyewitness,’ or ‘discredited eyewitness.’ The controlled condition is the level of guilt assigned by the participant after hearing details of a crime. The results supported the hypothesis. There were significant differences between the gender and eyewitness types when assigning levels of guilt. Female participants rated higher levels of guilt overall while both genders rated higher levels of guilt to the unrefuted eyewitness group over the other eyewitness types, which shown similar measures.

The results of this project showed that male expert witnesses were perceived more likeable to the fake jurors than the female. When people

For the past 45 years in the world of academia only 206 articles were published about jury simulations with the inclusion of jury deliberations (Devine, Clayton, Dunford, Seying & Pryce, 2001). This is a rate of about 4.6 articles per year, a very small number in comparison to all the articles that are published with out jury deliberations. Jury deliberations are an important aspect of juror studies. There has always been ongoing concern amongst researchers about whether jury decision-making can be adequately replicated and studied in the lab. In order to achieve this the focus has often been that if a representable sample is used then the results can be highly generalizable to the public. This paper will attempt to argue that differences between a student sample and community based sample in mock jury studies are minimal and that

This paper discusses the different roles that are taken on by a forensic psychologist, and how those roles interact and affect each other and how the psychologist is about to do his/her job. It looks briefly at the history of the field. We discuss the forensic psychologist as the consultant, the therapist, the researcher, as well as the expert witness. This paper also discusses predicting dangerousness and whether or not an expert can predict dangerousness. Finally we look at conflicting roles and ethics in the field.

1144); implying, it is imperative that individuals working within the legal system become aware of this theory to ensure that they are developing their case based on the individuals motivations rather than allowing their own biases (both implicit and explicit) to cloud their judgment. Blasi and Jost (2006) warns that ignoring SJT “may lead to serious errors in predicting attitudes and behaviors, both in a developing legal regimes intended to constrain behavior and in shaping arguments and policy interventions” (p. 1145); consequently, SJT can have a large impact on the legal system more than one might believe. SJT can assist in an array of different legal aspects for example, juror selection. One may take into account their clients group status to determine if either lower or higher group members may appeal to their client. According to Blasi and Jost (2006), another aspect that may need to be taken into account would be how a lawyer frames a particular incident. Given that a juror may unconsciously perceive the defendant through a victim derogation or victim enhancement lens, a defense attorney may have to adjust their case to frame the circumstances in a way that will favor the client to promote less bias and more just legal proceedings. Bearing in mind these simple applications can assist in reducing the effect of SJT on the criminal justice

Future behavior is a question that is often asked of a forensic mental health professional. There are many reasons to include assessing potential future dangerousness or recidivism. This area of our work has great impact on the defendant’s life. The conclusions or opinion of the forensic mental health professional can sway the judge, jury, defendant, families, victim/s and society as a whole. This makes risk assessment both difficult and controversial, according to Hanson (2009) Risk assessments for crime and violence are different from other forms of psychological assessment because the presenting problem is not directly observed.