NCJ Number
116634
Date Published
1989
Length
18 pages
Annotation
Research using shadow juries or simulated juries has provided insights into how juries reach decisions and has also dispelled several common myths about juries.
Abstract
A shadow jury is one that sits in court, observes the case in full, and makes a decision in conditions under which it can be observed. In contrast, a simulated jury usually consists of students who assume the role of jury members and who judge fictitious cases under laboratory conditions. Studies conducted in Chicago, Oxford, New Haven, and London have shown these juries to be task oriented, to be involved in the decision to be made, and to be serious. Few of their decisions seem perverse in the sense that essential features of the case were ignored or distorted in deliberation or the decision reached by eccentric and irrelevant arguments. However, the jury does not seem to consider only the facts, while leaving the law to the judge. Instead, it discusses the facts in the light of the decision and within the constraints imposed by the court. In addition, juries act differently in different situations. Different arguments are used to support a majority tendency towards acquittal than are used to support the opposite tendency. Juries also often agree on the facts but disagree on their interpretation. Moreover, the rules that constrain jury deliberation have complex effects that are scarcely susceptible to more than the most general interpretation. Tables and 32 references.