Legal Psychology Gerhard Ohrband ULIM University, Moldova 10 th lecture Jury decision-making

Course structure Lectures: 1. Introduction into Legal Psychology – Theories of crime 2. Correctional treatment 3. Victimology 4. Police psychology 5. Testimony assessment 6. Criminal responsibility 7. Judicial judgments 8. Psychological assessment of families

Course structure Seminars: 9. Eyewitness testimony 10. Jury decision-making 11. Child abuse 12. Prostitution 13. Rape 14. Tax evasion 15. Stereotypes and prejudices in the law system

Jury decision-making Which law systems do use juries for deliberating on someone’s guilt or innocence? Example: 1995 – murder trial of O.J. Simpson Western societies: the jury as a symbol for democracy, fairness and justice

Impact Case: “The 1992 Los Angeles riots, which left 50 dead and 2,300 injured, were sparked by the perception that an all-white jury had delivered an unjust verdict of “not guilty” in the trial of white police officers accused of beating a black motorist”

Influence upon juries Juries are groups and can therefore be influenced by all kinds of group processes like Decision schemes Social loafing Social influence Group polarisation Leadership Groupthink

Influence upon juries Characteristics of the defendant or the victim Physical attractive defendants are more likely to be acquitted or to receive a lighter sentence Social group membership: blacks are more likely to receive prison sentences, and people who murder a white are more likely than those who murder a black to receive the death penalty (11.1 % versus 4.5 %)

Influence upon juries Laws and penalties Harsh laws with stiff penalties (e.g., the death penalty) tend to discourage juries from convicting – quite the reverse of the intention of many legislators who introduce such laws. Whether jurors do or do not support the death penalty has a reliable but small impact on the verdict: between 1 and 3 verdicts out of 100 would be affected.

Information processing Juries have to deal with enormous amounts of information presented in court. Research evidence: Recency effect: information delivered later in the trial is more heavily weighted in decision making. Inadmissible evidence (evidence that is given by witnesses or interjected by counsel, but is subsequently ruled inadmissible for procedural reasons by the judge) is also not disregarded by the jury – it continues to influence deliberation.

Information processing Suboptimal decision making Complex evidence Enormous amounts of evidence Complex laws and legal jargon

Leadership Juries always nominate one of their members to be the spokesperson or foreman. This person has a key role in guiding the jury to its verdict, as they occupy the role of leader. Research shows, the foreman is most likely to be someone of higher socioeconomic status, with previous experience as a juror, or who simply occupies the seat at the head of the table at the first sitting of the jury. Discussion: Are these necessarily indicators for the best person for the job?

Age, education and gender Jurors who are older, less well educated and of lower socio-economic status are more likely to vote to convict. Men and women do not differ, except that women are more likely to convict defendants in rape trials. Jurors who score high on authoritarianism favour conviction when the victim is an authority figure (e.g., a police officer). Jurors who are more egalitarian have the opposite bias of favouring conviction when the defendant is, say, a police officer.

Initial preferences If two thirds or more of the jurors initially favour one alternative, then that is likely to be the jury’s final verdict. Without such a majority, a hung jury is the likely outcome. The two-thirds majority rule is modified by a tendency for jurors to favour acquittal, particularly where evidence is not highly incriminating.

Jury size Larger juries, of say twelve rather than six members, are more likely to empanel representatives of minority groups. If minority or dissident viewpoints matter, they have more impact in larger than smaller juries.

Synthesis: factors affecting jury decision making Jury decision making Characteristics of the defendant or the victim Information processing Jury size Initial preferences Age, education and gender of the jurors Laws and penalties Leadership Within the jury