Lecture 10: jury decision making
Judge vs jury
● Summary offences (minor) CANNOT be tried by a jury
● Less serious indictable offences cannot be tried by a jury (thefts, breaches of
probation)
● Hghly serious indictable offenced MUST be tried by judge and jury (murder, treason,
piracy)
● Sometimes, defendant chooses (robbery, some sexual assaults)
Plead deals or they plead guilty: means no jury trial
Justicia: lady justice
● Roman mythology
● Blindfold: unbiased
● Scales: weighing all information
● Sword: fight for justice itself
Justice systems
● Adversarial: when judge serves as neutral arbiter, defence and prosecution (crown vs
defence), Canada and US
● Inquisitorial: Europe, judge is not neutral, lawyers are more passive, judge tells
people what to bring into the course, defendant if first person to take the stand, judge
asks them questions
Role of juries
● Primary used in criminal cases
● Consists of people
Jury composition and selection
● Venire: pool of potential jurors, fair cross selection (population can be juror!)
● Voir dire: selecting jurors from venire
Jury selection
● Jury
○ Peremptory challenge: don't need a reason
■ They can excuse 20 each for murder
■ They can excuse 12 each for all other
○ Challenge for cause: mini trial before trial, when one side believes there will
be a bias and they can assess and remove a juror who may be biased
■ Based on limited info
■ 2 members of jury pool decide (unique to Canada)
Jury eligibility
● Canadian citizen
● Live in the province who submitted the summons
● At least 18 years old
, ● Cannot serve in ontario if: Politician (senate, MP), law enforcement, doctor, judge,
mental disability, convicted of an indictable offence
Characteristics of juries
● Representativeness
○ Jury of one’s peers
○ Randomly selected from community
● Impartial
○ Juror should set aside any biases or prejudices
Juror bias: potential sources
1. Interest prejudice: personal interest in outcome, know person
2. Specific prejudice: specific about the case, ex case is about sexual assault and juror
has been sexually assaulted
3. Generic prejudice: broad view of the world that will affect decision of the case (ex:
racist)
R v. Guess 1998
● Gillian Guess: juror in murder trial, starts flirtation with defendant, has affair with him
and then relationship, spotted together, convicted for obstruction of justice
● Peter Gill: charged 2 counts 1st degree murder (not guilty at trial)
● “I have been convicted for falling in love and nothing more. I have not committed a
crime”
● Both convicted of obstruction of justice
What if jurors are not impartial?
● Adjournment: delay trial (media and intense scrutiny dies over time, too much media
exposure)
● Change of venue: move trial, same province but different city (Ex. Bernardo moved
outside of st catharines to GTA), due to pretrial publicity
What are the effects of pretrial publicity?
● Mock jury study
● Murder of his wife
● He walked in on wife trying to comit suicide, he went in to try and stop her but the
gun went off
● Negative PTP (he was having an affair) and positive PTP (he hates guns and he
planned a trip for them) pre trial publicity, as well as control condition
● News articles about defendant charged with murder
● 5 days delay
● Video of trial
● Told to ignore PTP
Percent guilty verdict
● Positive: 26
● Negative: 70
● None: 38
, Legal function of juries
● Two legal functions
○ To decide the facts from the trial evidence
○ Decide on verdict
● Burden of proof: reasonable doubt
● Sentencing not a function of Canadian juries (parole eligibility in 2nd degree murder
cases)
Would you choose trial by judge or jury?
● Kalven and Zeisel 1996
○ Asked judges about recent jury trials
○ Sample of judges go through the cases, judges looked and decided cases
and so did jurors but not together
○ What was the jury’s verdict?
○ What verdict would you have given?
Percent of all trials
Jury: 30 acquits, 64 convicts, 6 hung
Judge: 17 acquits, 83 convicts, 0 hung
Jury selection: general features
● Personality: authoritarianism (more likely to be conservative/republican, follow the
rule of the law, hold biases and prejudice, more rigid)
● Attitudes: rape myths (she was asking for it), capital punishments (put to death)
Jury selection: case specific
● Jury consultants
○ Identify the characteristics of the ideal juror to have or to avoid
● What do Michael Jackson, Martha Stewart and O.J. Simpson have in common?: all
paid a lot for jury consultants
OJ simpson: sample from 294 questions
● Have you ever had your spouse or significant other call the police on you for any
reason, even if you were not arrested?
● Have you ever asked a celebrity for an autograph?
● Have you ever given a blood sample to your doctor for testing?
● Are there any charities or organizations to which you make donations?
ACTIVITY
● Michael Dunn (white) v Jordan Davis (african american) (shot the car that was
playing loud rap music and killed Jordan Davis)
● Which jury members would you prefer if you were defence or crown?
Defence (michael dunn)
● High authoritarianism
● No children
Prosecution (jordan)
Judge vs jury
● Summary offences (minor) CANNOT be tried by a jury
● Less serious indictable offences cannot be tried by a jury (thefts, breaches of
probation)
● Hghly serious indictable offenced MUST be tried by judge and jury (murder, treason,
piracy)
● Sometimes, defendant chooses (robbery, some sexual assaults)
Plead deals or they plead guilty: means no jury trial
Justicia: lady justice
● Roman mythology
● Blindfold: unbiased
● Scales: weighing all information
● Sword: fight for justice itself
Justice systems
● Adversarial: when judge serves as neutral arbiter, defence and prosecution (crown vs
defence), Canada and US
● Inquisitorial: Europe, judge is not neutral, lawyers are more passive, judge tells
people what to bring into the course, defendant if first person to take the stand, judge
asks them questions
Role of juries
● Primary used in criminal cases
● Consists of people
Jury composition and selection
● Venire: pool of potential jurors, fair cross selection (population can be juror!)
● Voir dire: selecting jurors from venire
Jury selection
● Jury
○ Peremptory challenge: don't need a reason
■ They can excuse 20 each for murder
■ They can excuse 12 each for all other
○ Challenge for cause: mini trial before trial, when one side believes there will
be a bias and they can assess and remove a juror who may be biased
■ Based on limited info
■ 2 members of jury pool decide (unique to Canada)
Jury eligibility
● Canadian citizen
● Live in the province who submitted the summons
● At least 18 years old
, ● Cannot serve in ontario if: Politician (senate, MP), law enforcement, doctor, judge,
mental disability, convicted of an indictable offence
Characteristics of juries
● Representativeness
○ Jury of one’s peers
○ Randomly selected from community
● Impartial
○ Juror should set aside any biases or prejudices
Juror bias: potential sources
1. Interest prejudice: personal interest in outcome, know person
2. Specific prejudice: specific about the case, ex case is about sexual assault and juror
has been sexually assaulted
3. Generic prejudice: broad view of the world that will affect decision of the case (ex:
racist)
R v. Guess 1998
● Gillian Guess: juror in murder trial, starts flirtation with defendant, has affair with him
and then relationship, spotted together, convicted for obstruction of justice
● Peter Gill: charged 2 counts 1st degree murder (not guilty at trial)
● “I have been convicted for falling in love and nothing more. I have not committed a
crime”
● Both convicted of obstruction of justice
What if jurors are not impartial?
● Adjournment: delay trial (media and intense scrutiny dies over time, too much media
exposure)
● Change of venue: move trial, same province but different city (Ex. Bernardo moved
outside of st catharines to GTA), due to pretrial publicity
What are the effects of pretrial publicity?
● Mock jury study
● Murder of his wife
● He walked in on wife trying to comit suicide, he went in to try and stop her but the
gun went off
● Negative PTP (he was having an affair) and positive PTP (he hates guns and he
planned a trip for them) pre trial publicity, as well as control condition
● News articles about defendant charged with murder
● 5 days delay
● Video of trial
● Told to ignore PTP
Percent guilty verdict
● Positive: 26
● Negative: 70
● None: 38
, Legal function of juries
● Two legal functions
○ To decide the facts from the trial evidence
○ Decide on verdict
● Burden of proof: reasonable doubt
● Sentencing not a function of Canadian juries (parole eligibility in 2nd degree murder
cases)
Would you choose trial by judge or jury?
● Kalven and Zeisel 1996
○ Asked judges about recent jury trials
○ Sample of judges go through the cases, judges looked and decided cases
and so did jurors but not together
○ What was the jury’s verdict?
○ What verdict would you have given?
Percent of all trials
Jury: 30 acquits, 64 convicts, 6 hung
Judge: 17 acquits, 83 convicts, 0 hung
Jury selection: general features
● Personality: authoritarianism (more likely to be conservative/republican, follow the
rule of the law, hold biases and prejudice, more rigid)
● Attitudes: rape myths (she was asking for it), capital punishments (put to death)
Jury selection: case specific
● Jury consultants
○ Identify the characteristics of the ideal juror to have or to avoid
● What do Michael Jackson, Martha Stewart and O.J. Simpson have in common?: all
paid a lot for jury consultants
OJ simpson: sample from 294 questions
● Have you ever had your spouse or significant other call the police on you for any
reason, even if you were not arrested?
● Have you ever asked a celebrity for an autograph?
● Have you ever given a blood sample to your doctor for testing?
● Are there any charities or organizations to which you make donations?
ACTIVITY
● Michael Dunn (white) v Jordan Davis (african american) (shot the car that was
playing loud rap music and killed Jordan Davis)
● Which jury members would you prefer if you were defence or crown?
Defence (michael dunn)
● High authoritarianism
● No children
Prosecution (jordan)
