skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 66364 Find in a Library
Title: JURY SIMULATION - THE IMPACT OF JUDGE'S INSTRUCTIONS AND ATTORNEY TACTICS ON DECISIONMAKING
Journal: JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY  Volume:71  Issue:1  Dated:(SPRING 1980)  Pages:68-72
Author(s): R REED
Corporate Author: Northwestern University
School of Law
Managing Editor
United States of America

Williams and Wilkins Co
United States of America
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 5
Sponsoring Agency: Northwestern University
Chicago, IL 60611
Williams and Wilkins Co
Baltimore, MD 21202
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: A LABORATORY STUDY OF THE IMPACT OF JUDGE'S INSTRUCTIONS, INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE, AND PROSECUTOR'S IMPEACHMENT STRATEGY ON JURORS' VERDICTS IS REPORTED.
Abstract: EACH OF THE 214 COLLEGE STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY OF 1 OF 8 VERSIONS OF A TRIAL INVOLVING 3 DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH BREAKING AND ENTERING AND POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA. VARIABLES WERE THE LEVEL OF INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE, AND THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF JUDGE'S INSTRUCTIONS AND ATTEMPTS BY THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY TO DISCREDIT DEFENSE WITNESSES. JUDGE'S INSTRUCTIONS AND LEVEL OF INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE, BUT NOT PROSECUTOR'S IMPEACHMENT STRATEGY, EXERTED A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON VERDICTS. JURORS WITHOUT INSTRUCTIONS WERE MORE LIKELY TO VOTE GUILTY OR REPORT NO DECISION. JUDGE'S INSTRUCTIONS APPEARED TO MOVE SUBJECTS FROM INDECISION OR CONVICTION TO MORE LENIENT VOTING. IN ADDITION, 70 PERCENT OF INSTRUCTED SUBJECTS WHO RECORDED NO DECISION CHANGED TO A VERDICT OF GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY WHEN ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN. THE STUDY FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT JUDICIAL INSTRUCTIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN FURTHER RESEARCH ON JURY DECISIONMAKING. ONE INCIDENTAL FINDING WAS THE RELATIVELY LARGE NUMBER OF COLLEGE STUDENTS VOTING GUILTY IN A CASE INVOLVING MARIJUANA CHARGES--A RESULT THAT BRINGS INTO QUESTION PROSECUTORS' AUTOMATIC REJECTION OF YOUNG PERSONS AS JURORS IN DRUG CASES. SUPPORTING DATA AND FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.
Index Term(s): Attorney-jury interaction; Jury decisionmaking; Jury instructions; Prosecutors; Studies; Witness impeachment
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66364

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.