Forensic psychology has made unique contributions to risk assessment with respect to the potential for violence and dangerousness, the accuracy of eye witness testimony, the dimensions and assessment of legal competency According to Krauss, Liberman, & Olson, the Texas dealth penalty case Barefoot v. Estelle showed that jurors are more influenced by less scientific clinical expert testimony, and less influenced by more scientific actuarial expert testimony. By applying cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST) to juror decision-making, the present study was undertaken in an attempt to offer a theoretical rationale for the findings (Krauss, Liberman, & Olson, 2004). Based on past CEST research, 163 mock jurors were either directed into a …show more content…
Juror bias against this form of testimony could lead to unjust outcomes for defendants when more scientifically valid guided professional judgment expert testimony is weighed less heavily by jurors than less accurate clinical expert testimony. Although the goal of this study was to misrepresent processing mode in order to better understand when participants would apply different types of expert testimony, it is possible that courts or attorneys might want to inspire jurors to embrace experiential or rational processing modes. The results of this study are consistent with those that would have been predicted by CEST. According to the article jurors who received an experiential mode manipulation found the clinical expert testimony more significant in their decisions than the other two types of expert testimony presented while jurors who received a rational model manipulation found the actuarial expert testimony more powerful than other types of expert testimony (Krauss, Liberman, & Olson, 2004). Although this testimony’s poor performance in one study of mock jurors is not sufficient grounds for large scale concern, it is troubling that this testimony performed so poorly in equivalence with other types of expert testimony utilized (Krauss, Liberman, & Olson). Forensic psychologists are not allowed to testify on the
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.”
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.
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.
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
The book is written by, Slotkin, Richard. Lost Battalions: The Great War and the Crisis of American Nationality. New York, N.Y: Henry Holt and Company, 2005. Print. During the Great War, American Nationality and a nation struggling with inequalities came to the forefront. Slotkin concentrates his writings on the heroic African American troops of the 369th Infantry and the legendary 77th “lost battalion” composed of New York City immigrants. These brave men fought in a foreign war they didn’t even believe in; what they were really fighting for was the right to be treated equal
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.
During these chapters nine generations of Shem’s descendants, the Semites pass through. In the beginning of these chapters God calls on Abram, who is living with his father Terah and his wife Sarai on Haran. God makes a covenant with Abram, promising to make Abrams’s descendants into a great nation. Abram agrees to leave is home and move southwest to Canaan with his wife and his nephew, Lot, to a land that God has promised to give to Abram’s descendants. Abram takes up residence there and erects a number of altars throughout the land as symbols of his devotion to God.
"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
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.
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
During the early developments of America, multiple states instituted the practice of owning African-Americans and using them as slaves. Surprisingly, this form of slavery was not only present in the Southern states, but also in the Northern too. Plantation owners from all over found their use in owning slaves, and were even shown taking advantage of the practice. By having ownership of slaves, it often contributed in farming production on plantations and also became useful when it came to voting. Unfortunately, though, the practice was abused by many plantation owners. When looking back at the many accounts written at the time, there seems to be a pattern of how the slaves were treated. Furthermore, the accounts additionally revealed problems that not only existed in the south, but also in the north too. Therefore, by using an account of a traveler visiting America and a plantation owner who owned slaves, it’s able to understood on how the slaves were actually treated within society. These two sources not only reveal a problem amongst the owners, but also reveal a side of the North that many did not know.
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.
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.