NCJ Number
199418
Journal
Judicature Volume: 86 Issue: 4 Dated: January-February 2003 Pages: 192-199
Date Published
January 2003
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This article presents the findings of a survey of 4,951 Fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers to determine their views of jury trial innovations intended to improve jury decisionmaking.
Abstract
Nearly one-third of those sent questionnaires responded. The jury innovations for which opinions were sought were juror note-taking, allowing jurors to question witnesses, discussions among jurors about the case during the trial, permitting alternative jurors to observe deliberations, opening statements to prospective jurors before voir dire, summary of expert testimony before or after the witness testifies, time limits for case presentation, and reordering the presentation of expert witnesses at trial according to subject matter. The experienced trial lawyers and trial judges surveyed expressed support for juror note-taking, structured and judicially monitored questions by jurors, discussions among jurors during trial according to defined legal instructions, and the involvement of alternate jurors in all phases of trial and deliberations. The respondents also favored a limited, factual overview of the case to be tried, presented by the trial lawyers to all prospective jurors prior to voir dire. This was believed to facilitate jury selection and improve juror understanding of his/her ability to sit as a juror. Similarly, abbreviated arguments to the jury by the trial lawyers at important phases of the trial, such as the presentation of expert evidence, were believed by the respondents to increase the ability of trial jurors to understand the significance and relevance of testimony. Judicial supervision of the presentation of evidence and time limits lacked the support of the respondents. Respondents supported the phasing of expert and other important evidence so that the jury hears related and contrasting opinions and facts concurrently.