NCJ Number
52373
Date Published
1978
Length
38 pages
Annotation
THE INTERACTIONS OF THE JUDGE, ATTORNEYS, JURY MEMBERS, WITNESSES, DEFENDANT, AND THE LAW ITSELF DURING A TRIAL ARE EXAMINED, TOGETHER WITH OTHER ASPECTS OF COURTROOM PROCEDURES AND ROLES, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR REFORMS.
Abstract
THE FILTERING PROCESS THAT KEEPS MOST CASES FROM REACHING THE TRIAL STAGE IS REVIEWED, WITH REFERENCE TO PLEA-BARGAINING PROCESSES AND DIVERSION PROGRAMS. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE DEFENDANT USUALLY IS AT THE MERCY OF THE PLEA-BARGAINING SYSTEM, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE OFFICIAL ADVERSARY APPROACH OF THE COURT. THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS IN CRIMINAL TRIALS IS OUTLINED, TRIAL TACTICS ARE EXPLAINED, AND THE ROLES OF THE DEFENDANT, WITNESSES, JUDGE, AND JURY ARE DISCUSSED. STUDIES OF JURY DECISIONMAKING ARE CITED, AS ARE STUDIES AND OTHER MATERIALS CONCERNED WITH THE PANELS FROM WHICH JURIES ARE DRAWN, JURORS' BACKGROUNDS, VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION, EFFECTS OF PRETRIAL PUBLICITY ON JURIES, AND JURY SIZE. THE ROLE OF THE JUDGE IS ANALYZED IN TERMS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS, FACTORS IN JUDGES' CAREERS AND DECISIONS (E.G., POLITICAL PRESSURES, ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS, PERSONAL TRAITS, PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND), AND SENTENCING PROCEDURES. ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE JURY SYSTEM ARE REVIEWED, AS ARE SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE PERFORMANCE OF BOTH JURIES AND JUDGES. AMONG THE SUGGESTIONS ARE USE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS TO SCREEN JURORS, USE OF JURORS WHO ARE SPECIALISTS IN THE MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION, PUBLIC EDUCATION IN THE NATURE OF JURY ACTIVITY AND FACTFINDING, AND USE OF EXPERTS TO CLARIFY TESTIMONY FOR JURORS. OTHERS HAVE PROPOSED THAT JUDGES BE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO COMMENT ON THE EVIDENCE, THAT RECORDS BE KEPT OF JURY DELIBERATIONS SO THAT JUDGES CAN DETERMINE HOW A VERDICT WAS REACHED, THAT JURIES RENDER SPECIAL VERDICTS (DETERMINATIONS ON SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT) RATHER THAN GENERAL VERDICTS OR THAT SEVERAL JUDGES DECIDE EACH CASE IN PLACE OF A JURY. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUGGESTED THAT JUDGES BE TRAINED IN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, THAT TRIAL JUDGES MAKE WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT, THAT JUDGES UNDERGO PSYCHOANALYSIS, AND THAT JUDGES NOT WEAR SPECIAL ROBES DURING TRIALS. OTHER REFORMERS HAVE URGED THAT A 'SUNSHINE' APPROACH BE TAKEN TO PRETRIAL PROCESSES, WITH SYSTEMATIC RECORDING OF DISCUSSIONS LEADING TO PLEA BARGAINS AND DIVERSION. OTHERS HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THE JUDGE'S SENTENCING DISCRETION BE LARGELY ELIMINATED AND THAT THE JUDGE ACT AS A TECHNICAL ARBITER. SUCH JUDGES COULD TRAIN FOR THE BENCH, TAKE CIVIL SERVICE TESTS, AND DEVOTE THEIR CAREER TO THE OCCUPATION, RATHER THAN ENTERING IT LATE IN LIFE WITHOUT ANY SPECIAL TRAINING. IT IS NOTED THAT UNDERSTANDING THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE COURTROOM WILL MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO DECIDE WHICH EXISTING PROCEDURES ARE FAIR AND JUST AND WHICH DESERVE SERIOUS RECONSIDERATION. A LIST OF REFERENCES IS INCLUDED. (LKM)