The differences between the Scientific Jury Selection process and allowing the Defense and Prosecution to select Jurors on their own has changed the way the Defense and Prosecution selects possible Jurors during the voir dire Jury selection. Some Psychologists disagree with the manner of which the Scientific Jury selection is conducted. Most all-major law firm’s use contracted help for Jury selection. Having a proper Jury selection and expert witnesses will help the Prosecution and Defense prove guilt or innocents of a given suspect. Some complain that by having extra Contractors during trial may slow the due process of the trial. This paper is to determine whether Scientific Jury Selection improves the case or not.
Using Psychologists as consultants for jury selection has become a regular procedure for most Attorneys. This gives the client every conceivable chance that they need to win a case even grim cases with troublesome out come. During the Voir Dire process of selecting Jurors attorneys from both sides, the Prosecution, Defense, and the Trial Judge can question the prospective Jurors this is the perfect time to use Contracted Psychologists to help choose what Jurors are best for the trial: Garland, Norman (2006) Criminal Evidence Fifth edition.
Now of course the Defense is going to select Jurors that are similar to the Defendant such as job preference, living conditions, place of residence, race and culture, income and social grouping. This way the defendant and the Jurors will have something in common to base their decisions on. The Prosecution wants to expose the victim’s testimony rather than the defendant’s testimony. In this way, the Prosecution will try to obtain a Jury that is against the Defense. They would rather place the people that are complete opposites of the defendant’s life style on the Jury Panel. The Prosecution usually looks for middle-aged business minded people that have no record of wrongdoing. This allows the Prosecution to have an advantage over a defendant that is a non-law abiding citizen, thus selecting good citizens that have no prior records. The Judge is present to mediate the trial keeping the selection of Jurors as even as possible in order to make the judgment fair for both parties allowing the argument and the complaint to be rational, conducting the trial in a civilized manner. Choosing, a verity of people with different cultural backgrounds for the Jury could alter the outcome of the verdict. The Judge has to make sure that the verdict is fair and correct thus excluding any radicals that may hinder the trial process: Hutson, Mathew (2007) Psychology Today.
The Scientific Approach to Jury selection has been around since the early 1970’s. This approach suggests that the people on the Jury are able to effect the trial just as much as the evidence presented during the case. While selecting the Jury a number of Psychological and Social experts are called in to determine who is best suited for the type of trial that they are about to enter. Jury selection has become so involved simply because of the many different types of people that could possibly be chosen to represent the overall public. The process of hiring a Trial Consultant automatically makes your decision for the right Jurors better than average and extends a Jury to be made up of helpful individuals that may have some background or specialty in an area that you want to be examined closely. I think personally that hiring a consultant for Jury selection is a very good idea that increases your chance of winning your court case: Clary, Audrey (2002) Psychologist Villanova University.
Others do not like the fact that, if you as a Prosecutor or a Defense have the money you can hire yourself a contracted Psychologist that can work, close with the Lawyer staff to find the best combination of Jurors. The experts provided may make a better trial and can possibly allow the suspect to be let off if evidence is hard to determine. This makes the trial unfair for Defendants with low-income who only have enough to pay the lawyer fee. In this case, the Prosecutor has the ability to alter the trial and thus make it hard for the Defense to prove innocents. Some of the considerations for reforms of Scientific Jury Selection are to outlaw the actual process of using Coaches or Consultants during Jury selection. Another way to limit the Consultants is to restrict the questioning of would be Jurors during the Voir Dire hearing. Reducing the peremptory challenges by the attorneys could also limit the Consultants that are contracted. The fact that the cost of Expert Contractors may be a little much for an average person using Contractors could over whelm the Defensive Attorney by handing them extensive research by the Prosecution during trial: Clary, Audrey (2002) Psychologist Villanova University.
References
Clary, Audrey (2002) Psychologist Villanova University from source http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200703/unnatural-selection
Garland, Norman (2006) Criminal Evidence Fifth edition
Hutson, Mathew (2007) Psychology Today from source http://www.publications.villanova.edu/Concept/2005/jury_selection.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment