Accuracy Of Verdicts Research Articles

An Experimental Study of Strategic Voting and Accuracy of Verdicts with Sequential and Simultaneous Voting

In a model of simultaneous voting, Feddersen and Pesendorfer (1998) consider the possibility that jurors vote strategically, rather than sincerely reflecting their individual information. This results in the counterintuitive result that a jury is more likely to convict the innocent under a unanimity rule than under majority rule. Dekel and Piccione (2000) show that those unintuitive predictions also hold with sequential voting. In this paper, we report paired experiments with sequential and simultaneous voting under unanimity and majority rule. Observed behavior varies significantly depending on whether juries vote simultaneously or in sequence. We also find evidence that subjects use information inferred from prior votes in making their sequential voting decisions, but that information implied by being pivotal in simultaneous votes does not seem to be reliably processed.

Accuracy of Verdicts under Different Jury Sizes and Voting Rules

Juries are a fundamental element of the criminal justice system. In this article, we model jury decision making as a function of two institutional variables: jury size and voting requirement. We ex...

Comment on “Accuracy of Verdicts under Different Jury Sizes and Voting Rules”

Comment on “Accuracy of Verdicts under Different Jury Sizes and Voting Rules”

Leveson’s narrow pursuit of justice

Sir Brian Leveson’s Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings (2015) represents the latest judicial effort in England and Wales supporting executive attempts, under the guise of ‘efficiency’ measures, to scale back protections traditionally afforded to criminal defendants and has dramatic implications for the maintenance of accurate case outcomes. This includes the integrity of the prosecution process, in particular the reliability of CPS decision-making; the quality and completeness of the disclosure regime; the culture of the CPS; and its management and oversight. This article will argue that the Review adopts a narrow approach to ‘efficiency’ which takes no account of the interest in the accuracy of verdicts, as set out in Rule 1.1.(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Rules, and will have no bearing upon the ‘real inefficiencies’ of the process. What appears to be the core of the Review is in fact floss surrounding its competing ambition: shifting cases to magistrates, intensifying pressure to plead guilty, marginalizing the defence, and diminishing jury trial.

The education of jury members: Influences on the determinations of child witnesses

The present study investigated the impact of an education program on jurors’ abilities to reach truth during trials with child witnesses. The experiments took the form of staged trials, with actors filling the roles of judge, prosecution, defence and defendant. Participants from the general community served as mock jurors in small groups. Prior to the trial, half of the juries were provided with an education package which served to introduce them to the main empirical findings within the child witness literature. Within each education condition, half of the juries viewed accurate child witness testimony during the trial and half viewed an inaccurate version. Analyses of the trial questionnaires revealed significant effects of education on the accuracy of verdicts, with more educated jurors making correct verdict determinations than did uneducated jurors. Educated jurors’ perceptions of the child witnesses were also more accurate overall than those of uneducated jurors.