Table of Contents Back to the Front Page The Impact of Graphic Injury Photographs on Liability Verdicts and Non-Economic Damage Awards September 2009's Favorite Thing Civil Case Mediations: Observations and Conclusions Identifying Leaders Hate Crimes and Revealing Motivation through Racial Slurs Anthropomorphism in Technical Presentations Will It Hurt Me In Court? Weapons Issues and the Fears of the Legally Armed Citizen Alternative Cause Strategies in Product Liability Litigation: The Need for Affirmative Defenses Comment on this article: Name Email (Optional. We will not publish your email address here or elsewhere.) Comment Maximum 5,000 characters. Character count: 0 When you submit this message, you give The Jury Expert permission to publish it on the web. As this is a professional journal, editors will publish comments that are courteous and respectful (even when in disagreement). Thanks for participating in the TJE community! Recent Comments: Philip Cave has blogged at Court-Martial Trial Practice on 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog Dennis Elias has blogged on Damages: The Defense Attorney's Dilemma See the blog post Paul Scoptur has pointed his blog readers to this issue of The Jury Expert See Paul's blog Edward Schwartz has blogged on Damages: The Defense Attorney's Dilemma See the blog post K_Yew has pointed his blog readers to 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog Sean Overland has blogged on Damages: The Defense Attorney's Dilemma See the blog post Feminist Law Profs blog wants to know where the women are. We know where Lawyers USA has written a piece featuring Katherine James and her article on Live Communication See the article Steven G. Pietrick has commented on Preparing for the Prep Question See the comment David Oliver at Mass Torts: State of the Art Blog has cited 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog Scott Henson of Grits for Breakfast has cited 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog Julie Campanini has blogged on Out & Proud See the blog post Grey Tesh sends readers of Palm Beach Criminal Lawyer Blog to see 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog post Tyler Cowen sends his readers from Marginal Revolution blog to see 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See Tyler's blog Forensic Focus Forums has begun a discussion on Law on Display See the forum posts Book Forum has cited Don't Poke Scalia on their Omnivore page See the post Book Forum has cited Jurors & the Internet on their Omnivore page See the post Christina Spiesel comments on Ted Brooks' blog post regarding Law on Display See the comment Susan Levy comments on Damages: Defense Attorney's Dilemma See the comment Edward P. Schwartz comments on Law on Display See the comment Karen Franklin has blogged on this issue of The Jury Expert See the blog Sean Overland has blogged on Jurors and the Internet See the blog post Publius comments on Enron to Broadcom See the comment Judge John DiMotto references Jurors and the Internet on his blog See the blog Ted Brooks has blogged on Law on Display See the blog post Kevin Boully has blogged on 16 Simple Rules for Better Jury Selection See the blog Louisville Courier-Journal has published on article (Taser-death verdict challenged over juror's conduct) which references our Jurors & the Internet article See the Louisville Courier-Journal Florida Bar Journal has published an article (Reining in Juror Misconduct) citing our Jurors & the Internet article See the Florida Bar Journal article Howard Wasserman has blogged on Don't Poke Scalia at his Federal Courts blog See the blog Ric Dexter has commented on What Preparation Does Your Witness Need See the comment David Badertscher has blogged on Jurors & the Internet at his Criminal Law Library Blog See the blog Phil Cave has blogged on Live Communication at his blog Court-Martial Trial Practice See the blog Melissa M. Gomez has blogged on Jury Research for Settlement on her blog at the Legal Intelligencer See the blog Doug Keene has blogged on this issue of The Jury Expert at his firm blog: The Jury Room See the blog Martin G. commented on When Jurors Nod See the comment E. Oliver commented on When Jurors Nod See the comment Gregory Cusimano commented on Live Communication See the comment Matt M. commented on Jurors and the Internet See the comment W. Stuermer commented on Don't Poke Scalia See the comment David Schwartz commented on Don't Poke Scalia See the comment Janet commented on Don't Poke Scalia See the comment Jason Barnes commented on When Jurors Nod See the comment Jason Barnes commented on Jurors and the Internet See the comment Thaddeus Hoffmeister blogged on Jurors and the Internet at his blog Juries See the blog Adam Chandler blogged on Don't Poke Scalia at SCOTUS blog See the blog Thaddeus Hoffmeister commented on Jurors and the Internet See the comment Edward Schwartz has blogged on Jury Research for Settlement at the Jury Box Blog See the blog Sean Overland has blogged on Jury Research for Settlement on his blog at Overland Consulting See the blog T. Guthell, MD has commented on Jurors and the Internet See the comment David Badertscher has listed our Table of Contents at his Criminal Law Library Blog See the blog Sean Overland has blogged on Identifying Leaders See the blog Edward Schwartz has blogged on Terror Management Theory in the Courtroom See the blog Joseph C. Markowitz has blogged on Civil Case Mediation See the blog Phyllis G. Pollack has blogged on Civil Case Mediation See the blog Victoria Cooke has commented on Graphic Injury Photographs See the comment Glenn Meyer has commented on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Paul Silver has commented on Civil Case Mediation See the comment Wendy Saxon comments on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Arch Stanton comments on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Ted Brooks has blogged on Anthropomorphism in Technical Presentations See the blog post Karen Franklin has blogged on Hate Crimes & Racial Slurs See the blog post Matthew McCusker comments on Civil Case Mediation See the comment benezra1970 comments on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Wendy Saxon comments on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Wendy Saxon comments on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment L.L. Stewart commented on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment benezra1970 has commented on Gender and Assault Weapons See the comment Phil Cave has blogged on Identifying Leaders See the blog post Doug Keene has blogged on Affirmative Defenses in Product Liability Litigation See the blog post Vickie Pynchon has commented on Civil Case Mediations See the comment Cheryl Lubin has commented on Civil Case Mediations See the comment Anne Reed has blogged on The Jury Expert's September issue See the blog post Paul Scoptur has blogged on Civil Case Mediations See the blog post Kevin Boully has blogged on Gender & Assault Weapons See the blog post Edward Schwartz has blogged on Identifying Leaders See the blog post Ken Broda-Bahm has blogged on Jury Damage Awards in Recession See the blog post Rita Handrich has commented on Hate Crimes & Racial Slurs Read the comment Phillip Miller has blogged about Identifying Leaders See the blog post Charli Morris comments on Impact of Graphic Injury Photographs Read the comment Diane Levin has done a blog post on Observations in Civil Mediation See the blog post Cameron Reed has blogged about Narcissism in Gen Y See the blog post Stephanie West Allen has done a blog post on Observations in Civil Mediation See the blog post Edward Schwartz comments on Will It Hurt Me in Court Read the comment Cheryl Lubin comments on From the Conference Room to the Courtroom Read the comment Jim Brock comments on Lights, Camera, Action! Read the comment Jason Barnes comments on Lights, Camera Action! Read the comment Jason Barnes comments on Jury Damage Awards in Times of Recession Read the comment Sean Overland comments on the Book Review of The Juror Factor Read the comment Dennis Elias comments on Jury Damage Awards in Times of Recession Read the comment Gayle Herde comments on Using Your EAR in Voir Dire Read the comment Bob Schiffmann comments on What Preparation Does Your Witness Need Read the comment Jason Barnes comments on What Preparation Does Your Witness Need Read the comment Alison K. Bennett comments on Using Your EAR in Voir Dire Read the comment Ted Brooks replies to a comment on Jurors and Technology Read the comment Jason Barnes comments on Jurors and Technology in Trial Read the comment Kelley Tobin comments on What Preparation Does Your Witness Need Read the comment Kacy Miller comments on Jurors and Technology in Trial Read the comment Charli Morris comments on What Preparation Does Your Witness Need Read the comment Carol Phillips comments on Gen Y & Narcissism Prevalence Read the comment Diane Wyzga comments on Juror Stress Read the comment Edward P. Schwartz comments on Turning Expert Witnesses Into Teachers Read the comment Phillip Miller comments on Turning Timelines Into Plotlines Read the comment Jason Barnes comments on Turning Timelines Into Plotlines Read the comment Phillip Miller comments on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Ric Dexter comments on Turning Timelines Into Plotlines Read the comment Stacy Fergurson comments on Grime & Punishment Read the comment Jeri Kagel comments on Turning Timelines Into Plotlines Read the comment Rita Handrich comments on Grime & Punishment Read the comment Sean Overland responds to Jeri Kagel's comment Read the response George Kich comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Kacy Miller responds to comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Laura Rochelois comments on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Sonia Chopra comments on Grime & Punishment Read the comment Bob Kaufman comments on Injured Body, Injured Mind Read the comment Steve Laird comments on Injured Body, Injured Mind Read the comment Steve Laird comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Jeri Kagel comments on Anti-Gay Bias in the Courtroom Read the comment Dave Zehner comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Sean Overland responds to Pat McEvoy's comment on Anti-Gay Bias in the Courtroom Read the comment Brian Bornstein responds to Steven Gursten's comment on Injured Body, Injured Mind Read the comment Jason Barnes responds to Ted Brooks' comment on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Ralph Mongeluzo comments on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Ted Brooks comments on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Diane Wyzga responds to Keeping Secrets Read the comment Jason Barnes responds to Patrick Norha's comment on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Patrick Norha comments on Turning Timelines into Plotlines Read the comment Douglas L. Keene comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Bruce A. Beal comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Ken Broda-Bahm comments on Keeping Secrets Read the comment Pat McEvoy comments on Anti-Gay Bias in the Courtroom Read the comment Steven Gursten comments on Injured Body, Injured Mind Read the comment Philip Monte comments on Ethical Issues in Racial Profiling Read the comment Valerie Hans comments on the book review: The American Jury. Read the comment Elaine Lewis comments on The Preparation of Narcissistic Witnesses. Read the comment

Identifying Leaders

Comments 4 | Rating

 

Identifying Leaders

Barbara Rich Bushell

 

You, with juror profile and rating sheet in hand are about to pick a jury. Before exercising your first strike, identify the leaders.

 

Jurors have sized up their peers by the time they are directed to choose a foreperson. They have already taken into account his race, gender, dress, and appearance. They have even assessed his socio-economic class by listening to him describe his residence, town or neighborhood, occupation, education, military background, marital status, and even his children's accomplishments. Trial consultants observing mock trials marvel at the speed in which the foreperson is chosen. Most often the process takes a few minutes. Jurors make this decision without knowing anything about the foreperson's ability to lead a group.

 

How do jurors come to this quick decision? Forepersons reflect our society's definition of power and success. They tend to be higher status white males and are often college educated. Many have had prior jury experience. Their behavior and accoutrements (an attache or soft computer case, a collared shirt, or sports jacket) alert fellow jurors that they are high status people. During mock trials, they usually walk into the jury room, take a place at the head or middle of the table, and tend to be the first to inform the group of the need to vote for a foreperson.

 

Choosing a foreperson is one of the most important decisions the jury will make. This decision affects how the verdict will be decided and the verdict itself. Forepersons bring their personality, ways of dealing with a group, and abilities to the process. Some may be authoritarian and controlling, allowing only a few jurors to express opinions. Others may be open to each juror's ideas or may have experience in facilitating groups. Still others may be so disorganized that a fellow juror will step in to guide, assist or even take control of the proceedings. This is often seen when the Court has assigned the role of foreperson.

 

Forepersons are powerful. Clever forepersons can call for opinion polls at key moments and create majorities by calling for a vote when the majority of jurors share their verdict preference. Studies show that forepersons participate more than any other jurors in the deliberation process (Strodtbeck & Lipinski, 1985).

 

The foreperson determines the form that deliberations take, and that in turn, influences the verdict. Deliberations are verdict-driven, evidence-driven, or a combination of both. Verdict-driven deliberations occur when an immediate verdict vote is taken and discussion following it focuses on verdict options. Rarely does consensus in a verdict-driven jury reverse.

 

Evidence-driven juries do not vote until an extensive evaluation of the evidence is completed. Studies show that the form of deliberations is associated with final verdict. Kameda (1991) found that verdict driven juries were more likely to find the defendant liable in cases where two legal criteria were needed for a verdict of liability, but less likely when one criterion was needed. The opposite effect occurred with evidence-driven juries. Evidence-driven juries were less likely to return a verdict of liability when two criteria were needed, but more likely when one criterion was needed.

 

Forepersons also affect the size of damage awards. Boster (1991) and Diamond and Caspers (1992) showed that forepersons' pre-deliberation damage awards are strongly related to final jury awards. Forepersons can also dampen damage awards. (Bevan, Loiseaux, Mayfield & Wright, 1958 and Eakin, 1975).

 

Voir dire questions pertaining to occupation and leisure activities help identify potential forepersons. Look for managers, committee chairs, foremen, shop stewards, union officials, project leaders, civic and church leaders, and team leaders (bowling, tennis, golf leagues, etc.). Always ask what the panelist does, not just what his job title is, and ask how many people he/she manages.

 

 

The Instrumental Leader

 

While good forepersons move the deliberation process forward, instrumental leaders decipher information for fellow jurors. Instrumental leaders serve as information gatherers, fact interpreters, problem solvers, and even experts. Many jurors rely on their interpretation of the evidence. These leaders shape the jury story by interpreting and weighing evidence. It is important to remember that instrumental leaders' interpretations are products of their own perception, education, experience, intelligence, and level of understanding. At times, information gatherers provide inaccurate information or spout factoids. Naive jurors often accept this information as fact.

 

Jurors will often accept the instrumental leader's view if he/she expresses commonly held values and conveys his/her take or interpretation in an understandable logical way. At times, extremely bright or highly educated instrumental jurors are incapable of drawing fellow jurors into their camp because they are incapable of communicating in their language or idiom.

 

Analyze the facts and issues in your case and identify those jurors who have case-related training, education, or experience. Don't be quick to strike all jurors who know something about case facts and issues. Keep the jurors who will want to and be capable of expressing your views. Patent defense attorneys need defense jurors who have pertinent case experience or education to decipher and point out important differences between a patent and an alleged infringing product. Think outside of the box when looking for jurors who have pertinent knowledge or experience. I have seen a manicurist schooled in gels decipher a patent dealing with dental products and a genuine Hell's Angel explain a mechanical patent to fellow jurors.

 

Be cautious. Consider the socio-economic class from which certain juror pools are drawn. I have seen jurors rely on nurses' interpretations of complex medical facts. Make sure that the nurse espouses your litigant's stance. Be cautious of self- perceived experts. A juror with prior jury experience often becomes an expert in interpreting the law or jury instructions.

 

Other types of instrumental leaders are those jurors who take notes, count votes during polling, and at times, gently direct ineffectual leaders by suggesting that it's time to poll or that certain jurors have not been heard. Females usually fill these roles. At times, when the chosen foreperson is ineffectual, these leaders will usurp the foreperson's role by talking over the foreperson's directions and stating their own.

 

 

The Emotional Leader

 

There is a type of juror who listens to and even consoles other jurors when the case is moving into the third or fourth week and jurors have become bored or overwhelmed with ever increasing facts and issues. The emotional leader often acknowledges his/her peers' contributions by nodding his/her head or smiling. This type of leader acts as a negotiator or offers compromises. He/she sometimes affects damage awards by suggesting the jury average each juror's damage award. This is often done without taking into account specific damage award models.

 

Attorneys want this type of leader if they need a lot of time to present their case, but should be cautious if there is a question of high damage awards. Scrutinize the panelists and take note of the roles they play at home and at work. Is that panelist a special education teacher, social worker, psychologist, or coach? Watch potential jurors in the court room. See how they interact with their potential peers.

 

Summary

 

Jury selection is a misnomer. None of us are fortunate enough to select a jury. We must use our few strikes wisely. A juror profile is useful only when it is combined with a leadership rating. If you are representing the defense, identify plaintiff panelists who are potential leaders and visa- versa. Potential forepersons are generally better- educated males occupying higher status jobs. Note their dress, speech, and accoutrements. Note if they have previous jury service. Take note of what a panelist does and what role he/she assumes during leisure time. People assume similar roles in all walks of life. Find out if the panelist is a leader of his/her organization or if he assumes an instrumental role.

 

Identify instrumental leaders. Read or listen to a panelist describe his/her job. Listen to how panelists answer voir dire questions. Are they articulate? Will they be able to paraphrase your arguments and themes to their fellow jurors?

 

An accountant during damage discussions will often assume the role of damages expert and a lab assistant in a patent case may assume the position of technical expert. Nurses and nurse assistants often take on the role of medical experts in medical malpractice cases. A juror with previous jury experience may assume the role of an interpreter of jury instructions. These people can help your case only if their profile matches your profile of a good juror (e.g., defense, plaintiff, prosecution juror). Strike these people first if their profile matches the opposing side's good juror's profile.

 

Barbara Rich Bushell, Ph.D. is a trial consultant in New Jersey. She works on criminal and civil cases throughout the United States. You can read more about her on her webpage [http: //www. jurydynamics.com].

 

 

 

References

 

Bevan, W., Albert, R. S., Loiseaux, P. R. , Mayfield, P. N., & Wright, G. (1958). Jury behavior as a function of the prestige of the foreman and the nature of his leadership. Journal of Public Law, 7, 419-449.

 

Boster, F. J., Hunter, J. E., & Hale, J. L. (1991). An information - processing model of jury decision making. Small Group Research, 18, 524-547.

 

Devine, D.J., Clayton, L.D., Dunford, B.D., Seying, R., and Pryce, J., (2001). Jury Decision Making. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 3, 622-727.

 

Diamond, S. S. & Casper, J. D. (1992). Blindfolding the jury to verdict consequences: Damages, experts, and the civil jury. Law and Society Review, 26, 513-557.

 

Eakin, B.A. (1975). An empirical study of the effect of leadership influence on decision outcomes in different sized jury panels. Kansas Journal of Sociology, 11, 109-126.

 

Kalven, H. and Zeisel, H., (1966). The American Jury. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

Kameda, T. (1991). Procedural influence in small-group decision making: Deliberations style and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 245-256.

 

MacCoun, R. J., & Kerr, N. L. (1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33.

 

Strodtbeck, F.L., & Lipinski, R.M. (1985). Becoming first among equals: Moral Considerations in jury foremen selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 927-936.

 

Citation for this article: The Jury Expert, 2009, 21(5), 12-15.

Full Issue   Full Article   Send to a Friend   Rate this article:

Sean Overland wrote:
Nov-11-2009

---

Phil Cave wrote:
Oct-11-2009

---

Edward Schwartz wrote:
Sep-29-2009

---

Phillip Miller wrote:
Sep-25-2009

---

Publication Information

The Jury Expert is now on Twitter (@thejuryexpert)! Follow us for daily news relevant to improving litigation advocacy, understanding jury behavior, resources that aid your practice, and sometimes, stuff that's just plain fun. http://www.twitter.com/thejuryexpert The Jury Expert [ISSN: 1943-2208] is published bimonthly by the: American Society of Trial Consultants 1941 Greenspring Drive Timonium, MD 21093 Phone: (410) 560-7949 Fax: (410) 560-2563 http://www.astcweb.org/

Editors of The Jury Expert Rita R. Handrich, PhD — Editor Kevin R. Boully, PhD — Associate Editor Ralph Mongeluzo, Esq. -- Advertising Editor   The Jury Expert logo was designed in 2008 by: Vince Plunkett of Persuasium Consulting

The publisher of The Jury Expert is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. The accuracy of the content of articles included in The Jury Expert is the sole responsibility of the authors, not of the publication. The publisher makes no warranty regarding the accuracy, integrity, or continued validity of the facts, allegations or legal authorities contained in any public record documents provided herein. Authors retain copyright of their written work. Author supplied graphics which illustrate technology or design ideas are considered the intellectual property of those authors. The Jury Expert itself is copyrighted by the American Society of Trial Consultants (ASTC).