Criminal Justice Research Paper Examples

The sample research papers on criminal justice topics have been designed to serve as model papers for most criminological topics. These papers were written by several well-known discipline figures and emerging younger scholars who provide authoritative overviews coupled with insightful discussion that will quickly familiarize researchers and students alike with fundamental and detailed information for each criminal justice topic.

See also:

Browse our collection of more than 100 criminal justice research papers below.

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Need a Custom Research Paper?

Police Stress Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. This research paper defines police officer stress and describes its consequences, origins, and the individual and orga­nizational methods to control it. Controlling stress can enhance the delivery of police services and guide officers toward healthy lifestyles. One definition of stress is the wear and tear our bodies and minds expe­rience as we react to physiological, psychological, and environmental changes throughout our lives. It is a nonspecific response of the body to a demand for change. Its centerpiece is the relationship between an external event and an internal response: For every action, there’s a reaction. Stress is fundamental to life, but its consequences are experienced differently. When, for example, Hurricane Katrina set down in August 2005, each of us reacted differently to it. Such reactions depend on many factors, according to Hans Selye, the individual who coined the term stress. Different reactions to sim­ilar events are expected because we are different: physically (age and health), psychologically (intelli­gence and experiences), and environmentally (family, community, and personal relationships). Also, our body contains its own unique pharmacy, which pro­duces a chemical reaction of sorts, triggering a physi­ological and psychological response. Some responses are involuntary; for example, when we are extremely nervous, our palms moisten. Good stress (eustress) and bad stress (distress) are everywhere. Without stress, there could be no life. Just as distress fosters sickness and failure, eustress promotes wellness and success. Every aspect of polic­ing is stressful because experiences can instantly change: When an officer provides emergency care, that officer can become a victim, too. The FBI reports that each year, approximately 12 of every 100 (or 60,000) officers are assaulted. Police experiences can change from patrolling silent avenues to challenging dangerous suspects. The consequences of uncontrolled or untreated stress among officers show that they are 30% more likely to experience health problems than other per­sonnel, 3 times more likely to abuse spouses, 5 times more likely to abuse alcohol, 6 times more likely to experience anxiety, 10 times more likely to become depressed, and, oddly, the least likely of all occupa­tional groups to seek help. Stress is accumulative and, left untreated, can lead to a compromised immune system, illness, and death. Burnout or traumatic stress response is a coping device characterized by physical or psychological avoidance or distancing. Traumatic stress disorders include acute stress disorder (posttraumatic stress, consistent with overwhelming fear and revulsion), conversion reaction (hysteria, development of physical symptoms including blindness or paralysis), counter disaster syndrome (excessive excitement and overinvolvement), peace­keepers’ acute syndrome (rage, delusion, and frustration responding to atrocities), and Stockholm syndrome (identification with aggressors). No one experiences all these disorders, but without treatment or individual resolution, officers are […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Police Use of Force Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Police use of force is the application in a law enforce­ment capacity of physical or psychological coercion against citizens. Under the law, police officers have the authority to use force for enforcing laws, prevent­ing criminal activity, defending others, and defending themselves. They have the discretionary power to use different degrees of force against citizens who choose to violate the law. Forceful responses can range from officer presence to the use of weapons. One approach to understanding forceful responses against citizens is psychological. There is psychological knowledge bearing on (a) how officers formulate and carry out their decisions to use force by encoding situational information, making a decision to act, developing a plan of action, and initiating action; (b) how officers’ involvement in a force situation puts them at risk of experiencing stress that causes unfavorable changes in their perception and memory; (c) how police candi­dates with particular personality traits are at risk of on-the-job problems with using force; and (d) how officers whose job-related experiences involve trau­matic force situations are vulnerable to developing behaviors that lead to the use of excessive force. Decision Making An officer formulates and carries out a decision to use force against a citizen by encoding situational infor­mation, making a decision to act, developing a plan of action, and initiating action. Encoding Situational Information Encoding is a process in which the officer attends to situational con­ditions. It involves the sensory register, the first struc­ture of the officer’s memory system. The sensory register is responsible for registering all features of the force situation through sensory functions—for example, seeing a citizen holding a gun, hearing a gunshot, and smelling gunfire. Sensory systems keep the officer informed about the force situation. They extract infor­mation and convert it to electrical impulses that travel to the thalamus, which is located in the diencephalon of the brain. The thalamus directs sensory input to associated cortex areas of the brain, where the officer becomes aware of sensation and interprets it. Making a Decision to Act Making a decision to act takes place in the officer’s short-term memory. The officer consciously discriminates, selects, and attends to sensations that are most dangerous, while reducing attention to less dangerous information. The officer considers the magnitude of the force situation and the probability of harm occurring if he or she takes no protective or enforcement action. What researchers know with confidence is that officers consider citizen behavior most important when making decisions to use force. A need to use force triggers cognitive events that help the officer develop a best plan of action. If the officer fails to pay attention to important sensory […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Prison Overcrowding Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. With well over 2 million individuals confined in jails and prisons in the United States, it is easy to under­stand why the federal prison system and 24 state prison systems were above their rated capacity at the end of 2004. The data supplied by the Bureau of Justice Statistics revealed that the federal prison sys­tem had the highest rate of overcrowding in 2004 (140%), but this was only because states such as Alabama, California, Delaware, and Illinois housed a significant portion of their inmate populations in pri­vate and contract facilities. Local and county jails held 747,529 offenders in mid-2005, which represents approximately one third of the incarcerated popula­tion. These facilities were at 95% capacity, although this figure is deceptive because research indicates that smaller jails often operate well below their rated capacity, whereas larger metropolitan jails often oper­ate well above their rated capacity. Prison overcrowding is of particular interest in the United States, in part because of the number of people who are confined in American jails and prisons and in part because of several well-known court cases in which states have been ordered to improve the condi­tions of confinement to include alleviating overcrowd­ing. However, prison overcrowding is neither a particularly new nor an exclusively American prob­lem. With the advent of the prisoners’ rights move­ment in the early 1970s, prison conditions have come under increased scrutiny. One such area of increased scrutiny is the degree to which the inmate population exceeds the rated capacity of the institution in which it is housed. Furthermore, concerns about prison over­crowding extend beyond the borders of the United States. Canada, Great Britain, and the Scandinavian countries have recently raised concerns about prison overcrowding, and many nations in Africa, Asia, and South America have prisons that are more crowded than those in the United States. Measurement Prison overcrowding has traditionally been defined by density (i.e., the proportion of inmates to rated capacity of an institution; the ratio of single cells to multiple-person cells). A distinction can be drawn, however, between overcrowding and density. Whereas overcrowding is a psychological condition based on a perception of limited space by an incarcerated indi­vidual, density is a physical condition, such as the ratio of inmates to available space in an institution. There are two forms of density: spatial density and social density. Spatial density, the measure most often used in prison-overcrowding research, is normally calculated as the proportion of inmates in an institu­tion or prison system to the available space as estab­lished by the rated capacity of the institution or system. Prison and jail officials often consider their institutions overcrowded when they exceed 80% of […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Probation Decisions Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Probation officers’ decisions affect the legal experi­ences and case outcomes of a substantial number of defendants and offenders. Probation officers exercise discretion and use subjective judgments and standard­ized assessment tools in making decisions that influ­ence the dispositions of criminal cases and offenders’ progress under community supervision. Probation officers serve the court by providing judges with information, protect the community by enforcing the conditions of probation, and assist offenders to reinte­grate into the community by brokering services and other resources. Probation officers make decisions at the pretrial, presentence, and postsentence stages of the criminal justice process. Pretrial Decisions At the pretrial level, probation officers evaluate defendants for release on bail or pretrial supervision, which allows them to remain free while their case is pending. The evaluation process focuses on defen­dants’ risk of flight and their likelihood of continuing their criminal activity. Probation officers collect information on a variety of factors that are related to offenders’ ties to the community and their propensity to continue their criminal activity. Officers use inter­viewing techniques and data collection forms as the basis for their judgments. They must decide whether to recommend pretrial release and, if so, whether to recommend a bail amount or conditions of pretrial supervision, including curfews, home confinement, and drug testing. They also must decide what consti­tutes an infraction or violation of those conditions and how to respond to the infraction—for example, asking the judge to issue a warrant for a person’s arrest and ordering that the person be detained in jail until the case is heard in court. Presentence Decisions When the case proceeds to the trial or plea bargaining stage, probation officers help judges render sentences through presentence investigation (PSI) reports. Judges order presentence investigations, mostly in felony cases, to obtain background information that will guide them in imposing the most appropriate sanction. In particular, PSIs assist judges in ascertain­ing whether prison is an appropriate sentence in light of the crime and the offender’s criminal and social his­tory. Information in a PSI places the offense in a larger context that informs the judge in determining whether probation is a sufficiently punitive and fitting alterna­tive to incarceration. To obtain information for PSIs, probation officers interview offenders; review their criminal, educa­tional, and military records; and contact family mem­bers and others who know important details about the offender’s life. The PSI report presents the judge with the offender’s comprehensive social, criminological, and psychological profile. The report covers the offender’s history of treatment for medical, psychi­atric, and substance use disorders as well as the cir­cumstances of the offense. In addition, it covers his or her social and family relationships, present […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Procedural Justice Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. This research paper focuses on the psychology of procedural justice (PJ) and the law. PJ is a judgment about the fairness of the procedures employed to resolve con­flict. Psychological research shows that PJ enhances satisfaction with conflict procedures and outcomes independent of actual dispute outcomes or outcome fairness. Among the procedural criteria that enhance fairness are having one’s say, neutrality, benevolence, and respect—an effect that occurs in legal contexts across cultures. Research has shown that procedural fairness effects are diminished and outcome effects are enhanced when outcomes are favorable or when they pose threats to central moral values. The psychol­ogy of retributive justice concerns the fairness of responding to rule violations or legal infractions. PJ research can assist in the evaluation of alternative dis­pute resolution procedures, such as mediation and restorative conferences. Procedural Justice and the Law The earliest research on the psychology of fairness focused on people’s beliefs as to whether the out­comes of their conflict were fair. This distributive jus­tice research was the first to conduct empirical tests of the proposition that people’s satisfaction with the res­olution of conflict is influenced by outcome fairness rather than exclusively by outcome favorability—a proposition that dates to Aristotle. Although the origi­nal demonstrations of distributive fairness effects on satisfaction were not conducted in legal settings, subsequent research established the importance of outcome fairness for people’s satisfaction with the resolution of conflicts in legal settings as well. For example, a study of felony defendants found that their belief that their sentence was fair was a better predic­tor of their satisfaction with the outcome of their case than was the duration of their incarceration. The first systematic research concerning the psy­chology of procedural fairness was conducted by John Thibaut, a professor of psychology, and Laurens Walker, a professor of law. Their seminal work led them to theorize that disputants’ satisfaction with the resolu­tion of their conflicts was influenced by the fairness of the conflict resolution procedures as well as the fair­ness of the outcomes produced by those procedures. Furthermore, they proposed that beliefs about proce­dural fairness were influenced by the manner in which control was distributed between disputants and poten­tial third parties in litigation procedures (e.g., auto­cratic, adversarial, or negotiation procedures). Finally, they asserted that beliefs about procedural fairness were a critical determinant of litigants’ (and observers’) procedural preferences and their satisfaction with legal procedures and outcomes. Thibaut and Walker’s theory of PJ postulated that disputant process control and decision control were critical determinants of procedural fairness and satis­faction. The adversarial procedure was asserted to be superior because of its optimal distribution of control—allocating process control to the litigants or their […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Psychological Profiling Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Psychological profiling is a relatively new investigative technique that, in the past 30 years, has developed from what used to be described as an art to a rigorous science based on advanced empirical research. Results from the first wave of research have shown that there is validity to the idea that aspects of an offender’s char­acteristics may be inferred from the way the offender acts at the crime scene. Ongoing research is focused on refining these efforts so that a systematic and reliable framework may be put in place, one that can provide a solid basis for constructing a useful psycho­logical tool for police investigations. Psychological Profiling Definition Profiling (also known as offender profiling, crime scene profiling, psychological profiling, and personality pro­filing) is the process of linking an offender’s actions at the crime scene to their most likely characteristics to help police investigators narrow down and prioritize a pool of most likely suspects. Investigators’ efforts are focused on matching an offender’s behavior in one situ­ation to behaviors or characteristics in another situation. Psychologists are sometimes called on during a police investigation to analyze the behavioral indicators of the crime and, based on these, to draw up a profile of the most likely characteristics of an offender responsi­ble for such actions. In addition, psychologists continue to be involved in researching the processes of profiling itself, so as to establish its validity and utility as a police investigation tool. Psychological Profiling Development Although profiling was attempted as long ago as the mid-1880s, in the Jack the Ripper serial murder case in London, profiling as it is known today is a rela­tively new area in forensic psychology. Much of the early work in profiling dates back to the 1970s and 1980s, when there was an initiative to focus on analysis of the crime scene itself. Most of this work, typically done by practicing clinicians or police investigators, was based on understanding an individual’s behavior at the crime scene through interviews with actual offenders and primarily focusing on the offender’s internal motivations and drives, in addition to identi­fying specific behaviors. With its increasing popularity through the 1980s, and also with more recent efforts to bring profiling into court as evidence, the method came under increasingly close scrutiny by researchers within the field. Consequently, the 1990s saw the creation of a new area of forensic psychology, investigative psy­chology, spearheaded by David Canter and col­leagues, that focuses on the contribution of psychology to police investigations. Researchers in this growing field have stressed the importance of providing a solid methodological approach and framework for estab­lishing an empirically based science testing the psy­chological principles […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Prosecutorial Misconduct Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Prosecutorial misconduct is any courtroom behavior on the part of the prosecutor that violates trial rules and denies defendants their right to due process. Examples of misconduct may include making unfair or improper comments about the defendant, defense counsel, or a defense witness; suppressing, tampering with, or fabricating evidence; or making material mis­statements regarding law or fact. The legal and psy­chological importance of examining prosecutorial misconduct is its potential to induce a jury to consider improper factors during the decision-making process. Legal scholars contend that prosecutorial miscon­duct often occurs because of the prosecutor’s quest to secure a conviction. In doing so, prosecutors compro­mise impartiality by using improper methods to estab­lish guilt—for example, inappropriately inferring guilt from a defendant’s silence. Although higher courts consistently express disapproval of improper prosecutor conduct, they frequently affirm the convic­tion, concluding that some prosecutorial errors are harmless. For an error to be considered harmless, reviewing courts need to establish that the outcome of the trial was not significantly affected by the error. Forms of Prosecutorial Misconduct The most common form of prosecutorial misconduct occurs in argument to the jury; however, it can also take place in evidence hearings, opening statements, and cross-examination. For example, it is misconduct to comment on a defendant’s failure to testify. Similarly, it is improper for the prosecutor to address the credi­bility of the testimony of codefendants or co-conspirators. Commenting on a defendant’s silence, or inferring questionable relationships among defendants, improp­erly suggests guilt and encourages a jury to find the defendant guilty. It is also considered misconduct for the prosecutor to question the integrity of the defense counsel. This includes unconfirmed claims that defense counsel fabricated evidence, courtroom dis­plays of dissatisfaction with defense witnesses, or interruptions of defense objections. In general, any unsupported, damaging comments on the part of the prosecutor that challenge a defendant’s constitutional rights can be considered misconduct. A review of appellate decisions also finds prosecu­tors cited for misconduct regarding issues related to evidence. Prosecutors must not introduce or attempt to introduce inadmissible evidence and, in the same vein, must disclose evidence favorable to the defen­dant. It is misconduct for prosecutors to use false or misleading evidence, misrepresent evidence to the jury, or destroy or tamper with evidence. In addition, it is improper for the prosecutor to make material misstatements of law or fact. Opening statements must be limited to offering admissible evidence, and closing arguments must be limited to evidence presented. Repeated instances of uncorrected misstatements could result in ordering a new trial. Prosecutorial Misconduct in Capital Trials Prosecutorial misconduct has been identified as a leading cause of unfairness during the sentencing phase of […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Racial Bias and the Death Penalty Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. The issue of racial bias in death penalty has long been a significant concern in the system of capital pun­ishment. Many studies across the United States have found the race of the defendant (combined with the race of the victim) to be a salient predictor of juror decision making in capital cases, with Black defen­dants convicted of killing White victims to be most likely to receive the death sentence. Racial bias in cap­ital trials appears to be correlated with the following: (a) the ethnic background of the district attorney pur­suing the death penalty; (b) the racial breakdown of the jurors in capital cases; (c) jurors’ failure to understand jury instructions in death penalty trials; and (d) jurors’ attitudes toward the death penalty and their death qual­ification status. Research also suggests that whether Blacks’ physical appearance resembles racial stereo­types may be a factor in jury decisions. In the United States, 38 states use capital punish­ment as the ultimate penalty for defendants convicted of crimes such as first-degree murder, capital sexual battery, and treason. The United States is the only country in the Western world to employ the death penalty and, along with China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, is responsible for 94% of the world’s executions. Clearly, capital punishment is an extraordinarily controversial issue. The debate about the death penalty appears to be several fold, involving issues such as its lack of financial feasibility, its questionable deterrent value, the execution of innocent persons, diminishing public support for capital punishment, increasing public support for the alternative penalty of life without the possibility of parole, and lethal injec­tion constituting “cruel and unusual punishment.” One of the most salient controversies surrounding capital punishment is the fact that it appears to be arbitrarily and capriciously applied, with the majority of capital defendants and death row inmates being men of an ethnic minority charged with/convicted of killing a member of the ethnic majority. Legal Background The issue of racial bias was addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court 20 years ago in McCleskey v. Kemp (1987), in which the Court was forced to take a realis­tic look at the issue of social injustice in the application of the death penalty. In a brief submitted to the Court, social scientists concluded that prosecutors were 70% more likely to seek the death penalty against a Black person accused of killing a White person than in cases with any other racial composition. In addition, the study found that when Black defen­dants were convicted of killing a White victim, they were 22 times as likely to receive the death penalty as Blacks convicted of killing Blacks and 7 […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Religion and the Death Penalty Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Religion has the ability to affect death penalty trials in numerous ways. The most studied include the effects of jurors’ religiosity and religious appeals used by lawyers during trial. Religion also affects judges’ decisions. Although the study of how religion affects legal decision making is still in its infancy, religion has the potential to affect voir dire, trial presentation, and trial outcomes. Use of Religion in Voir Dire Before a trial begins, lawyers have the opportunity to exclude a set number of potential jurors who they believe will not favor their client. Lawyers often exclude potential jurors on the basis of personal characteristics such as religious beliefs or affiliation. For example, lawyers have excluded potential jurors because they were Jewish, Islamic, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Catholic, or Pentecostal. Other potential jurors have been excluded because they had strong religious beliefs, had acted as a missionary, or had served as a pastor. State courts are divided on whether the exclusion of potential jurors based on religion is legally permissible. Some state courts have held that lawyers can exclude potential jurors based on any religious variable, while others have determined that lawyers cannot exclude a potential juror for any factor related to religion. Still other courts have created rules that govern the exclu­sion of jurors. For instance, the court in United States v. DeJesus (2003) stated that it was permissible to exclude a juror because of his or her degree of religiosity (e.g., how often the juror prayed) but not because of his or her religious affiliation. The Indiana Supreme Court in Highler v. State (2006) held that lawyers cannot exclude a juror because of religious affiliation but that it is permissible to exclude a juror because his or her occupation is religious in nature. The U.S. Supreme Court had the chance to settle the controversy but declined to do so (Davis v. Minnesota, 1994). Thus, state courts can generally develop their own rules. Because few states prohibit using religious factors to exclude potential jurors, most lawyers are able to do so. Psychologists can provide information about how religious variables may affect jurors’ decisions, although the research has been sparse and sometimes contradictory. Conflicting findings likely represent the strong relative influence of individual case facts, the type of trial (e.g., capital or noncapital trial), and dif­ferent measurements of religious variables. Studies have investigated the relationships between religion and guilt verdicts, sentencing verdicts, and pun­ishment in nontrial settings. Early research shows that jurors who believe in a divine plan and life after death tend to be more likely to find a defendant guilty. Other research has found that individuals who believe […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •  

Scientific Jury Selection Research Paper

This sample criminal justice research paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers, are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on criminal justice at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services. Scientific jury selection (SJS) is the use of a survey to decide which jurors to favor in a trial. Prior to the 1970s, jury selection was done by attorneys based on their hunches. The new quantitative method was wel­comed enthusiastically by trial attorneys. Social scien­tists were more reserved. SJS led to the employment of social scientists as trial consultants. This entry describes traditional jury selection as conducted by attorneys, reviews the origin of SJS, presents an exam­ple of a 2003 survey used in Florida to implement SJS, and examines evidence on the utility of SJS. Voir dire is the process at the beginning of a trial when prospective jurors, called venirepersons, are examined verbally to determine their fitness for service as jurors in a particular trial. An unlimited number of venirepersons can be excused for cause—that is, found unfit by the trial judge for reasons of incompetence or prejudice. Venirepersons are also excused peremptorily, that is, by the attorneys without stated reason. The rules for using peremptory excusals vary by jurisdiction and preferences of trial judges. Judges differ widely in the questions they ask or allow the attorneys to ask. Some judges allow venirepersons to complete trial-specific questionnaires constructed by the attorneys. The infor­mation about venirepersons available to the attorneys varies greatly, given the court’s voir dire practice. Nevertheless, in U.S. courts, the parties (prosecution, plaintiff, and defendant) have a right to a certain num­ber of peremptory excusals. These peremptory excusals are determined and used during the jury selection process. Traditional Attorney-Conducted Jury Selection How do attorneys evaluate venirepersons and decide whom to favor or oppose? Lawyers are sometimes influenced by the published preferences of famous colleagues—the idols of the tribe. These famous trial lawyers have published preferences mainly based on ethnic, religious, gender, and occupational stereotypes that may often conflict with each other. These stereo­types were formed long ago and have no application to modern jurors or cases. Many attorneys hold other stereotypes that may have some limited value, for example, that nurses are unsympathetic to pain and suffering or that people who use newspaper coupons give stingy monetary awards. In addition, a trial attor­ney’s experience with a particular type of juror may result in prejudice for or against such jurors in future trials. Attorneys also evaluate venirepersons on the basis of “vibes”—their impression of the venireperson’s nonverbal behavior and deportment. Generally, the attorney has a limited profile of good and bad jurors derived from advice from other attorneys, prej­udices, speculation, and experience. Origin of Scientific Jury Selection In the 1972 Harrisburg Seven trial of Vietnam War resisters, Jay Schulman and colleagues decided to eval­uate […]

Like this post? Share it!
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •   
  •  
  •  
  •