Judges, Juries, and Judges, Juries, and Scientific Evidence Scientific Evidence Valerie P. Hans Valerie P. Hans 報告人：簡凱倫 簡凱倫 20110330 1 20110330 1
I ntroduction I ntroduction Most jurors are not screened for scientific Most jurors are not screened for scientific background knowledge, and adopt a background knowledge, and adopt a predominantly passive role as fact- -finders finders predominantly passive role as fact within the adversary system. within the adversary system. How well do laypersons understand complex How well do laypersons understand complex scientific and technical testimony presented scientific and technical testimony presented in this adversarial context? in this adversarial context? If they need help, how can jury assistance If they need help, how can jury assistance be integrated into the unique setting of the be integrated into the unique setting of the jury trial? jury trial? 2 2
I ntroduction I ntroduction This article also reports the intriguing This article also reports the intriguing findings of a new study involving state findings of a new study involving state and federal judges who watched clips and federal judges who watched clips of the same mtDNA mtDNA mock trial and mock trial and of the same answered some of the same questions answered some of the same questions as the jurors. as the jurors. 3 3
Complex Scientific Evidence and Complex Scientific Evidence and Jury Fact Finding Competence Jury Fact Finding Competence The agreement rates of judge and jury are The agreement rates of judge and jury are similar in both straightforward and complex similar in both straightforward and complex trials, indicating that failure to understand trials, indicating that failure to understand the evidence is not a major determinant of the evidence is not a major determinant of judge- -jury disagreement. jury disagreement. judge Instead, many disagreements are explained Instead, many disagreements are explained by the fact that compared to judges, juries by the fact that compared to judges, juries appear to require a stronger case by the appear to require a stronger case by the prosecution to convict the defendant. prosecution to convict the defendant. 4 4
Complex Scientific Evidence and Complex Scientific Evidence and Jury Fact Finding Competence Jury Fact Finding Competence Case studies examining juror Case studies examining juror comprehension of scientific testimony point comprehension of scientific testimony point out the types of expert evidence that can out the types of expert evidence that can present problems for juries. present problems for juries. Richard Richard Lempert's Lempert's review of thirteen review of thirteen complex trials concluded that even when complex trials concluded that even when juries did not completely understand all of juries did not completely understand all of the scientific details, jurors could usually the scientific details, jurors could usually comprehend enough of the testimony to comprehend enough of the testimony to engage in rational decision making. engage in rational decision making. 5 5
Complex Scientific Evidence and Complex Scientific Evidence and Jury Fact Finding Competence Jury Fact Finding Competence Research suggests that judges might be Research suggests that judges might be susceptible to various cognitive processing susceptible to various cognitive processing errors and biases, which in turn could errors and biases, which in turn could compromise their ability to make sound compromise their ability to make sound inferences. inferences. In sum, little work directly compares judge In sum, little work directly compares judge and jury responses to the same scientific and jury responses to the same scientific issues. issues. 6 6
Complex Scientific Evidence and Complex Scientific Evidence and Jury Fact Finding Competence Jury Fact Finding Competence Comparing judge and jury responses to the Comparing judge and jury responses to the same material might highlight distinctive same material might highlight distinctive attitudes, skills, and abilities of judges attitudes, skills, and abilities of judges versus juries, which in turn could have versus juries, which in turn could have implications for structuring their decision implications for structuring their decision making and allocating tasks between them. making and allocating tasks between them. 7 7
The Jury MtDNA MtDNA Study Study The Jury The mock trial, based on the facts and The mock trial, based on the facts and evidence presented in State v. Pappas State v. Pappas , , evidence presented in included scientific expert testimony about included scientific expert testimony about mitochondrial DNA evidence. mitochondrial DNA evidence. The jury study used volunteers from the The jury study used volunteers from the jury pool in New Castle County. jury pool in New Castle County. The jurors were assembled in groups of The jurors were assembled in groups of eight and watched a videotape of the mock eight and watched a videotape of the mock trial. trial. 8 8
The Jury MtDNA MtDNA Study Study The Jury The study varied whether mock jurors were The study varied whether mock jurors were able to use specific trial reforms such as able to use specific trial reforms such as note- -taking, asking questions of experts, taking, asking questions of experts, note following a checklist, and using notebooks following a checklist, and using notebooks containing experts' slides and a glossary of containing experts' slides and a glossary of DNA terms. DNA terms. 9 9
The Judge MtDNA MtDNA Study Study The Judge For practical reasons, judges read a For practical reasons, judges read a short summary of background short summary of background information about the case. information about the case. Judges then watched video clips of the Judges then watched video clips of the prosecution's expert, the defense prosecution's expert, the defense expert, closing arguments by both expert, closing arguments by both attorneys, and the judicial instructions. attorneys, and the judicial instructions. 10 10
The Judge MtDNA MtDNA Study Study The Judge The judges completed two The judges completed two questionnaires, one before and one questionnaires, one before and one after watching the mock trial, that after watching the mock trial, that contained many of the same questions contained many of the same questions the mock jurors answered. the mock jurors answered. 11 11
Judge and Jurors: Some Judge and Jurors: Some Background Differences Background Differences The juror represented a wide range of educational The juror represented a wide range of educational levels: levels: -- 2% who had not graduated from high school, 2% who had not graduated from high school, -- -- 24% who had a high school degree, 24% who had a high school degree, -- -- 30% who had taken some college courses, 30% who had taken some college courses, -- -- 29% with college degrees, 29% with college degrees, -- -- 14% who did post 14% who did post- -graduate work beyond their graduate work beyond their -- four- -year college degrees. year college degrees. four Judges were with college degrees and post Judges were with college degrees and post- - graduate law degrees. graduate law degrees. 12 12
Judge and Jurors: Some Judge and Jurors: Some Background Differences Background Differences For judges, the reported average was 10.29 For judges, the reported average was 10.29 courses across high school and college. courses across high school and college. For jurors, the reported average was 9.72 For jurors, the reported average was 9.72 courses (not statistically different ). courses (not statistically different ). 13 13
Judge and Jurors: Some Judge and Jurors: Some Background Differences Background Differences 33% of the overall juror sample, who possessed 33% of the overall juror sample, who possessed college degrees, reported an average of 14.04 college degrees, reported an average of 14.04 science and math courses (significantly more science and math courses (significantly more courses on average than the judges). courses on average than the judges). If science and math courses provide crucial If science and math courses provide crucial background for the understanding of scientific background for the understanding of scientific evidence, then the college educated blue ribbon evidence, then the college educated blue ribbon jurors possess more of that background than either jurors possess more of that background than either the pool of judges or the full pool of jurors. the pool of judges or the full pool of jurors. 14 14
Recommend
More recommend
