DISCRETIONARY LAW HOLDS THAT A JURY, GIVEN CERTAIN INFORMATION, CAN VIEW IT OBJECTIVELY AND MAKE A JUST DECISION. FROM A PSYCHODYNAMIC POINT OF VIEW, THIS IS A QUESTIONABLE ASSUMPTION. WITHIN THE ADVERSARY STRUCTURE OF A TRIAL, THE JURY MUST BE PSYCHODYNAMICALLY VIEWED AS A CHILD CAUGHT BETWEEN TWO POWERFUL, SEDUCTIVE, ADVERSARY PARENTS. THE ANXIETY, ANGER, CONFUSION, AND MIXED IDENTIFICATION THAT DEVELOP IN SUCH A FAMILIAL CONTEXT EMERGE IN THE COURTROOM. THE RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT FOR THE JURY IS MOST OFTEN INFLUENCED BY MORE POWERFUL 'LAWYER-PARENTS' AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THEIR SUGGESTIONS. THE ROLE OF SUGGESTION AND SUGGESTIBILITY IN THE LAWYER-JURY RELATIONSHIP MUST BE VIEWED ON A CONTINUUM FROM RELATIVELY MINIMAL INFLUENCE ON OPINION, ATTITUDE, AND INTERPRETATION TO MARKED ALTERATIONS IN PERCEPTION, LOGICAL ANALYSIS, AND BEHAVIOR. LAWYERS, AWARE OF THE PSYCHODYNAMICS OF MANIPULATION IN THE TRIAL CONTEXT, TRY TO INFLUENCE THE JURY ON THE BASIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES MORE THAN THE TECHNICAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW. TO THE EXTENT THAT A LAWYER SUCCEEDS IN STIMULATING A HYPNOTIC SYNDROME IN THE JURY, VOLITIONAL BEHAVIOR BY THE JURY IN REACTION TO WITNESS TESTIMONY AND MATERIAL EVIDENCE IS UNDERMINED. THE DANGERS OF SUCH A CIRCUMSTANCE IN CRUCIAL DISCRETIONARY DECISIONMAKING WARRANT CONTINUED RESEARCH THAT MAY RESULT IN MODIFICATIONS OF THE CHARACTER OF LAWYER-JURY INTERACTIONS. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)