Narrative
On June 12, 1994, the bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were discovered in the front of professional football player, OJ Simpson’s front porch. One of the biggest televised trial in history, OJ Simpson was held on trial for the accusation of the murder of his ex-wife and her boyfriend. During a time of hectic hate crime and police brutality, race and social status became a huge component of this infamous trial.
Background Information
The study of psychology and law is a subset of social psychology. Especially when it comes to jury decision making, psychology plays an important role on how a decision is reached. A jury is not supposed to be affected by evidence that isn’t explicitly mentioned in the court case. When
…show more content…
These people have observed the importance of evidence, external influences, and internal biases as factors that influence a jury’s decision. Evidence is one of the leading causes of jury bias because of its statistically significant impact on a jury’s final decision. There have been faults in verdicts due to poorly given evidence.“A major criticism of the jury system is that jurors frequently lack the capacity or competence to understand all aspects of the evidence, particularly in longer and more complex trials”(Tinsley, Yvette). If members of the jury are unaware of what the evidence is directly stating, they are more likely to present inaccurate arguments in jury …show more content…
This is because internal biases are always psychological. Some of the major internal biases that have been observed and studied are race, gender, attractiveness, and social status. Race, being one of the most commonly known judgment, is proven to have some influence on how a jury decides on their verdict. For example, “if jurors’ prototypes about crimes and criminal defendants are racially biased at the outset, those prototypes may be invoked to find minority defendants, or those who kill White victims, more worthy of death sentences”(Winter, Ryan). These biases are usually thought subconsciously so the juror is unaware that they are stereotyping the defendants thoughts. When a member of the jury found the suspect to be attractive or unattractive, it has been shown to impact their verdict. “Less attractive people are considered more likely to be guilty compared to attractive people”. “The study found that 40 subjects who were shown photographs of attractive and unattractive people overwhelmingly chose the latter group as probable armed robbers and murderers”(Kirk,
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
Smith, William (1997) “Useful or Just Plain Unfair? The Debate Over Peremptories; Lawyers, Judges Spllit Over the Value of Jury Selection Method” The Legal Intelligencer, April 23: pg 1.
With jury bias we examined that the perspective taking, victim impact statements and race of the victim had no main effects with ps > 0.26 and no significant interactions either with ps > 0.64.
After a lengthy two hundred and fifty-two-day trial “not guilty” were the words that left the world in shock. O.J Simpson was your typical golden boy. He had it all, the nice car, the football career, and his kids. Unfortunately, this all came to an end when two bodies came to be spotted deceased in Nicole Browns front yard and was a gruesome sight. O. J’s ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman both found with brutal stab marks. Unfortunately, all his glory days now brought to an end, he went from playing on the field to begging for his freedom when becoming the main suspect of their murders. Since this trial has not only altered the way Americans viewed celebrities, but it also racially divided society,
On June 12,1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered. Their bodies were discovered outside Nicole Simpson's condominium. Nicole Simpson was the estranged wife of the famous football player and T.V. star O.J. Simpson.
Jurors opinions can be influenced by an emotional testimony. Deborah W. Denno’s article Neuroscience, Cognitive Psychology, and the Criminal Justice System is the Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law’s publication of a panel at the 2009 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools. The panel had three goals: “examine the interrelationship between neuroscience and substantive criminal law; to incorporate criminal procedure more directly into the examination in a way that past investigations have not done; and to scrutinize cognitive bias in decision-making,” (Denno
It was the night of June 12, 1994, a woman and her long time male friend are murdered in cold blood. The victims, Nicole Brown Simpson, her neck cut so savagely it was almost severed from her body and Ronald Goldman, stabbed repeatedly, nearly 30 times. The accused, her ex-husband and football star, Orenthan James Simpson, better known as O.J. Simpson. During the trial, a trial that consisted of 150 witnesses, lasted 133 days and cost in the ball park of 15 million dollars, there were many questions asked and even more questions left unanswered (Douglas).
A crime being committed is the first event to initiate our criminal justice system. On June 12th 1994 a double murder was reported at the residence of Nicole Brown Simpson the ex-wife of the then beloved Orenthal James (OJ) Simpson. It was discovered that Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman had been brutally murdered and the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) began their investigation, this being the second step in our criminal justice system.
The amount of Psychological research about the impact of social stereotypes on juror’s decisions is increasing. Previous studies have looked at everything from the effect of differences in social categories (Deaux, K, 1984) to the gender of the perpetrator (e.g., Clark, H.L., & Nightingale, N.N., 1997; Mallozi, J., McDermott, V., & Kayson, W . A., 1990). The current study questions whether or not male defendants are always more likely to be found guilty compared to female defendants, or does the match with the crime type matter? Jurors are randomly selected citizens who are given the task of determining whether someone is guilty or not, based solely on the evidence provided by the court. (Functions and Duties of a Juror, n.d.) However, jurors, who like all other humans, have the potential to be biased, meaning that their final decision can sometimes be influenced by many factors.
They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair
Walking into a room there are two people sitting on either side of you. To your right, sits a female who is dressed in all black and has multiple piercings and several tattoos. To your left is an average looking and plainly dressed middle aged man. At first glance in each of their directions whom would you suspect to be victim of circumstances and who would you believe to be a murderer? Understanding the scenario can give insight on how in the criminal justice system, appearances and actions contrary to social norms, in addition to prejudice, can influence court decisions and jury trials.
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.
Lieberman in Scientific Jury Selection states, “...scientific jury selection originated in criminal trials in which academic researchers provided assistance to defense counsel because the researchers were concerned about the government having disproportionate degree of power and control over the outcome of cases.” As stated before, a jury does not have to think about the laws or the influence of the judge and lawyers, they must simply agree on what they believe happened. Some juries depend on facts or evidence, while others decide on if they believe the story others decide on their moral stances. This all comes back into why psychology is so important in the process of jury selection. When a juror decides the fate of an individual they don’t necessarily just use their brain, they use their heart, or their beliefs. What someone believes in can only be interpreted through psychology, the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context. Trying to predict the outcome of someone's decisions is very difficult, that's why we have so many specialists, and consultants that are used in trials to determine the best possible pathway for a criminal
Fairchild, H. & Cowan, G (1997). Journal of Social Issues. The O.J. Simpson Trial: Challenges to Science and Society.