| Volume 22, Issue 4, July 2010 | Download Current Issue | Previous Issues | Letters to the Editor | Search |
|---|
|
What We Do (and Don't) Know about Race and Jurors
Sam Sommers reviews his previous research findings on juries and race and discusses what can be generalized from those findings (and what cannot). In particular, he works to clarify the concept of "race salience". Three trial consultants offer their thoughts in reaction to his article.
Wall Street's reaction to jury verdicts involving publicly-traded litigants While we know the stock market has been on a roller coaster for the past few years, here's a novel take on the relationship between jury verdicts involving publicly traded litigants and stock prices. An experienced trial consultant reviews the data and makes recommendations on what to consider as you approach trial.
An experienced trial consultant and attorney discusses why the popular Reptile Theory is incomplete when it comes to telling persuasive stories to juries. Jill Holmquist presents the Triune Brain and argues for the importance of appealing to all (brain) aspects of our human jurors.
Persuading with Probability: The Prosecution of O.J. Simpson Pondering over how to use probability to your advantage at trial? Daniel Denis presents ideas as to how to present probability arguments to jurors and an experienced trial consultant responds.
Tattoos, Tolerance, Technology, and TMI: Welcome to the land of the Millennials (aka Generation Y) Two experienced trial consultants review the data (from research and polls) on what we really know about the Millennial Generation. Much of what we read in blogs, on the internet and in the mainstream media is composed of opinion and anecdote. This article focuses on what we know from the data and then explores how you can use this information in case presentation and preparation, voir dire and pretrial research; case themes; and in challenging your own beliefs and assumptions as you prepare to take a case to trial.
White guilt is defined as "the dejection or compunction that Whites feel when they witness a discriminatory act or observe the consequences of a racist act". How does white guilt play out in court? How can you see it and know it and sort out what it means for your case. A literature review is presented and three experienced trial consultants offer their reactions to how best to use this concept in the courtroom.
Presumed Prejudice, Actual Prejudice, No Prejudice: Skilling v. U.S. The Supreme Court decision in Skilling v. U.S. focuses our attention on pretrial publicity and the Honest Services doctrine. In this article, Thaddeus Hoffmeister reviews the history behind the Skilling decision and discusses the decision and dissent in some detail. Lessons to be learned from this decision are also described.
Emotions in the courtroom: "Need for affect" in juror decision-making A jury is instructed to not be swayed by emotions when making legal judgments. However, research indicates emotions are an integral component of decision-making. Just as some individuals are highly motivated to use logic and facts when making a decision, some individuals are highly influenced by emotions. The psychological construct "need for affect" (NFA) outlines individual differences in how emotions are incorporated into decision-making. This paper will introduce the NFA construct and its role in a legal setting. It will also highlight how attorneys and trial consultants can identify potential jurors' likelihood of approaching or avoiding the emotional factors of a case, and the degree to which their emotional response will impact their decision-making.
Note from the Editor on a hot and hazy summer issue.
|
