The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees individuals’ right to trial by an impartial jury. However, empirical research indicates that the jury system is flawed, especially regarding judicial sentencing instructions. More specifically, jurors frequently misunderstand or misinterpret State patterned instructions. On a more encouraging note, there is evidence that comprehension of jury instructions can be improved. Thus, this research assessed improvement in juror comprehension using revised sentencing instructions. For the current investigation, participants included 201 volunteers called for jury duty in Western Tennessee. Data were generated via a questionnaire, which allowed for the collection of information relating to participants’ understanding of the sentencing instructions. Findings suggest that comprehension is low when jurors are only exposed to instructions written by the State. Furthermore, when jurors were given a more detailed explanation of certain problematic terminology, comprehension significantly increased. Policy implications of this research and directions for future improvement are discussed.

Sound quality analysis is a tool designed to help determine customer preferences, which can be used to help the designer improve product quality. Many industries desire to know how the consuming public perceives their product, as this affects the product life and success. This research investigates which of the six sewing machines provided by Viking Sewing Machine Group (VSM group) consumers find most acoustically appealing. The sound quality analysis methods used include both jury based listening tests and quantitative sound quality metrics from empirical equations. The results from both methods are completely independent and are shown to have a very strong correlation. The procedures and results of both methods, jury listening tests and mathematical metrics, are presented. Near field sound intensity scans identified acoustic hot spots and give direction for possible design modifications to improve the acoustic signature of the two top tier machines, the Designer 1 and Creative 2144 (Husqvarna Viking and Pfaff respectively). This research determined that the entry level Pfaff Select 1530 has the most acoustically appealing sound of the six machines evaluated. In addition, it was also determined that a reduction in the higher frequency sounds produced by the machines is preferred over a reduction in the lower frequency sounds. Further investigations, including an evaluation of machine isolation and startup sounds, were also performed. The machine isolation results are highly dependant on the individual machine being evaluated and would require independent evaluation. In the machine startup sound assessment, it was discovered that again the Pfaff Select 1530 has the preferred sound. Near field acoustic intensity scans provide additional information on locations of strong acoustic radiation. The near field scans provided valuable design information. The acoustic "hot" spots were discovered to exist in the lower portions of the machines near the main stepper motor in the Designer 1, and radiating from the bottom plate of the machine in the Pfaff Creative 2144. This analysis has led to various design modifications that could be implemented to improve the sound quality of the machines, specifically the Designer 1 and the Creative 2144.

Previous research has demonstrated that judicial instructions on the law are not well understood by jurors tasked with applying the law to the facts of a case. The past research has also shown that jurors are often confused by the instructions used in the sentencing phase of a capital trial. Social scientists have used two different methods to improve juror understanding of legal instructions, psycholinguistic rewrites and bias-reduction techniques. Psycholinguistic rewrites of legal instructions have been shown consistently to improve juror comprehension of general legal instructions and instructions used in the sentencing phase of a capital trial, however, there has been a call in the literature to not only improve the clarity of judicial instructions but to address comprehension biases that interfere with jurors? ability to understand the instructions. Because a bias-reduction approach has received limited empirical testing and has never been tested on capital-sentencing instructions, this research sought to test the effectiveness of a bias-reduction approach with those instructions. Participants were randomly assigned to hear either Florida's pattern instructions used in the penalty phase of a capital trial or the same instructions with additional statements that mentioned and refuted biases thought to be associated with established areas of miscomprehension. After participants heard the judicial instructions, their understanding of the law on capital punishment decision-making was assessed. Additionally, the participants were asked to render a verdict in a hypothetical case. The results revealed that comprehension was higher for participants exposed to the bias-refutation statements than for participants who were exposed to only the pattern instructions. Among all participants, greater understanding of capital sentencing instructions was associated with an increased likelihood that mock jurors recommended a life sentence, but this observed association was not statistically significant when examining capital-juror eligible participants. The results of this study suggest that efforts should be undertaken to improve specific areas of Florida's capital sentencing instructions.

This dissertation examines jury nullification - the ability of American juries in particular criminal cases to ignore or override valid law to be applied to defendants by acquitting them in cases in which the facts are undisputed or clear - as an exercise of sovereignty over the friend-enemy distinction as those terms are defined by Carl Schmitt. It begins with a biography of Schmitt and a description of his concept of sovereignty as ultimate decisional power. It then discusses sovereignty in the American context, with particular attention to the principles of the Founding and the nature of the fictively constructed American people. It next applies Schmitt's concept of decisional sovereignty to the American context, concluding that sovereignty in America is diffuse, and its exercise by particular governmental actors is to some degree cloaked, and that the sovereignty of the American people, while crucial to the founding moment, is largely latent in ordinary times. This application of Schmitt to sovereignty in America also demonstrates the deep tension between democratic popular sovereignty and rule-of-law liberalism. The dissertation then turns to Schmitt's understanding of the distinction between friend and enemy as the central political axis, and argues that the criminal in the American context is functionally the enemy, if not the absolute enemy of the polity. It then discusses in detail the mechanics and history of jury nullification, ultimately concluding that jury nullification both operates at the crucial political moment at which enemies are generated (or not) through the application of criminal law to defendants, and is an act of popular sovereignty, intended by the Founders to help preserve a balance between democracy and liberalism by maintaining a central political role for the people.

As the most powerful position of the courtroom workgroup, the prosecutor plays an essential role in the criminal justice system. From the defendant's initial contact with the criminal court process when the prosecutor makes the charging decision, until sentencing when the prosecutor's recommendation guides judicial discretion, prosecutors hold the power to decide a defendant's fate. Despite the parameters that govern their ability to use discretion, the prosecutor still maintains a significant amount of power to influence crucial decisions with regard to the defendant. The current study addresses the issue of prosecutorial discretion and the ability to mishandle the powers bestowed upon such a powerful position. While prosecutorial discretion has a broad base, the study was narrowed to specifically concentrate on discretion as it impacts plea bargaining and final dispositions. Additionally, an analysis of the data looks at whether or not a defendant faces jury trial penalty for exercising his/her constitutional right to a trial by jury. A statistical comparison was constructed using data collected with respect to specific murder and sexual battery statutes over a 24-month period. Based on the statistical data provided within the study, those individuals who accepted the plea deal offered by the state faced a far less severe punishment than those who opted to go to trial.

The main objective in this research was to examine the extent to which gender and gender biases influence monetary benefits received, including jury award amounts, in workplace sexual harassment claims. Two methods were utilized to explore the discrepancies in monetary benefits received based on gender differences. The first method used was a survey to test various gender attitudes, attitudes on sexual harassment, and how influential a victim's gender was on determinations of damage award amounts in sexual harassment cases. 6 two-way factorial univariate between-subject analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to analyze the survey data. The second method in this project consisted of an examination of claims filed by victims of sexual harassment. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission statistics were broken down by gender with respect to resolution type. This provided a means to assess the actual monetary benefits received by both men and women across all possible forms of claim resolutions. In conjunction, these two methods provide a more balanced approach to the assessment of gender discrepancies in sexual harassment claims. Using a combination of actual claims of sexual harassment and survey data, rather than just one or the other, allows for direct comparison between perception and reality. The comparison of perception and reality allows for a more complete assessment of the state of sexual harassment claims as they relate to victim's gender. With a more complete assessment of sexual harassment claims and perceptions of sexual harassment it may be possible to bring to light potential injustices caused by gender or gender stereotyping, and correct any imbalances that may be present.

Across the country, African American defendants are being discriminated against in the criminal courts and by juries, particularly in capital cases.[1] This assertion is supported by two lines of research. First, an analysis of Supreme Court decisions focusing on the racial impact on voir dire. Second, social-legal studies on juror decision making have demonstrated legal and socio-legal histories providing evidence that demonstrate there is a racial bias in our system. Based on these findings, this paper sets forth several legal and policy recommendations to improve the fair adjudication of African American defendants charged with capital crimes. [1] Jack Glaser, Karin D. Martin, Kimberly B. Kahn, Possibility of Death Sentence Has Divergent Effect on Verdicts for Black and White Defendants (2015).

No description available.

No description available.

Yes / We examine links between factual recall, emotion and constructions of normativity in narrative accounts, using as an empirical case President Clinton's descriptions of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. We analyse those accounts in the sequences of talk in which they occurred, under Grand Jury cross-examination. Clinton's accounts of Lewinsky were part of how he attended to issues alive in court concerning himself, including his possible exploitation and abuse of power in an asymmetrical relationship; his motives, sincerity, credibility and intentions; and, indirectly, his fitness for office as President. Analysis focuses on how Clinton's portrayal of Lewinsky accomplished a reflexive portrayal of himself, not as mendacious and exploitative, but as caring, responsible, sincere, rational and consistent, while reducing the scope and implications of their admitted sexual relationship. This study is linked to a broader discursive psychology of factual description, memory, mental and emotional states, and their relevance to the larger business of institutional settings.