Court Jury Research Articles

“The Walking Wounded”: Youth, Public Education, and the Turn to Precarious Pedagogy

In his reflections on the realities of being young in postwar America, Paul Goodman warned in 1956 that living and learning under capitalist societies would stay “desperately hard” for youth so lon...

Perspectiva judicial de la violencia de pareja y doméstica en España

The present article reviews the history of the Spanish criminal justice on domestic violence until the enactment of the 2004 Law on Integrated Protection Measures against Gender Violence, which distinguishes between gender violence and domestic violence and attempts the integral recovery of the woman and the rehabilitation of the aggressor. From the data obtained by the Observatory against Domestic and Gender Violence of the General Judiciary Council, the application of the aforementioned Law by Spanish Courts (Jury Courts and Provincial Courts) on subjects such as the appraisal of extenuating, mitigating, aggravating circumstance, previous aggressions, application of Article 46 of the Criminal Justice Law is analysed, along with the presence of children as direct witnesses of the events. Finally, future proposals in the field of judicial protection and prevention are presented.

CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock

AbstractThe experiments reported in this paper investigated simultaneous identity matching of unfamiliar people physically present in person with moving video images typical of that captured by closed circuit television (CCTV). This simulates the decision faced by a jury in court when the identity of somebody caught on CCTV is disputed. Namely, ‘is the defendant in the dock the person depicted in video’? In Experiment 1, the videos depicted medium‐range views of a number of actor ‘culprits’. Experiment 2 used similar quality images taken a year previously, some of which showed the culprits in disguise. Experiment 3 utilised high‐quality close‐up video images. It was consistently found that in both culprit‐present and culprit‐absent videos and in optimal conditions, matching the identity of a person in video can be highly susceptible to error. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The People's Courts? Summary Justice and Social Relations in the City of London, c.1760–1800

Using the records of the Guildhall and Mansion House justice rooms, this article explores the summary justice process in the City of London in the second half of the eighteenth century. It suggests that there is much to learn about the way most Londoners experienced and used the law in this period. These courts were arguably more accessible to more people than the jury courts of Assize and Quarter Sessions that have remained the focus for most studies of the history of crime and criminality. This article will provide an introduction to the nature of these courts and to the sorts of offences and offenders that were brought to them.

Etnografia dissonante dos tribunais do júri

A partir de etnografia realizada, entre 1997 e 2001, nos cinco Tribunais do Júri da cidade de São Paulo, questiono se tribunais, em geral, e os do júri, em particular, se esgotam como arenas de luta nas quais o binômio dominação-sujeição se realiza de forma privilegiada. Sustento que, embora observemos, nesses espaços, rituais que reiteram hierarquias tradicionalmente estabelecidas, eles também permitem a construção de novas subjetividades e a redefinição de experiências sociais. Os fatos-dramas reconstituídos nos júris estão longe de seus contextos originais tanto quanto da possibilidade de se explicarem legalmente. Eles são de outra natureza, cujo sentido só se alcança no domínio ritualizado, lúdico e poético de sua própria expressão.

Realms of Oblivion: The Vienna Auschwitz Trial

On March 10, 1972, a little-known Auschwitz trial came to a rather unremarkable conclusion with the release of Fritz Ertl and Walter Dejaco. Both had served as SS architects in the Central Construction Directorate(ZBL)-Auschwitz. Both were part of a team responsible for designing and building the gas chambers of Birkenau. The District Attorneys' Office of Vienna had prepared the case against them with great ambition nearly a decade before. Prosecutors originally had in mind something like the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial in the Federal Republic of Germany, which included more than twenty defendants. Such plans were speedily curtailed. The court had only grudgingly agreed to try three defendants and then readily granted a motion to dismiss charges against one (Hermann Töfferl, a construction foreman). That left only two. “The public interest for this monster trial appears to be slight. The benches in the great jury court remain empty,” the Wiener Zeitung reported upon the opening of the trial. Less than two months later, the paper recorded the defendants' release, and no public debate followed.

Medicolegal analysis of injury during endoscopic sinus surgery.

To survey the causes, characteristics, and outcomes of malpractice litigation resulting from injuries sustained during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). A retrospective analysis of United States state and federal civil litigation involving injuries resulting from ESS. Sources were state and federal court decisions and jury verdict reports accessed through a computerized legal database. The 41 cases were decided or settled between 1990 and 2003. The cases and reports were analyzed for pertinent data regarding plaintiffs, defendants, allegations of wrongdoing, resulting injury, expert witnesses, and resulting verdict or settlement. Correlation between severity of injury and case outcome was analyzed. All suits reviewed involved ESS. Many cases included multiple causes of action, or types of malpractice, including negligent technique, 31 (76%); lack of informed consent, 15 (37%); and wrongful death, 2 (5%). The defendant-physician specialty was overwhelmingly otolaryngology, 40 (98%). The most common presenting complaint, or indication for surgery, was chronic sinusitis, 30 (73%). The injuries caused by surgery were frequently multiple, including cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, 10 (24%); brain damage, 6 (15%); diplopia, 7 (17%); and death, 2 (5%). The majority of cases reviewed (83%) resulted in a verdict rather than settlement. The result of the verdict or settlement was 17 (41%) in favor of the plaintiff, 23 (56%) in favor of the defendant, and 1 (2%) unknown. The average award was 751,275 dollars, with a median of 410,239 dollars and a range of 61,000 dollars to 2,870,000 dollars. This is the first study to review malpractice litigation resulting from injuries sustained during ESS and shows a hitherto unexpected pattern between severity of injury and case outcome.

Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Study1

AbstractDemocracy – or demokratia as the Greeks called it – first took shape in a few sixth‐century BC city‐states, arising from attitudes and conditions widespread in the Greek world. In the ensuing two centuries it became more common and continued to develop, especially in the city of Athens, where it attained its definitive and most influential form. (Other systems of rule, such as oligarchy and tyranny, remained common in Greek city‐states, however). Democracy meant that the demos (the people) governed the state directly, controlling affairs through such institutions as jury courts and mass assembly meetings, in which all citizens were eligible to take part, as well as through numerous elected or allotted posts, each held for a brief term only. The political ideals of freedom and equality animated demokratia, though they did not extend to women and slaves. Historians and other intellectuals, after many centuries of hostility to the idea of democracy, have more recently embraced it and its study. A survey of publications by classicists of the last twenty years or so reveals a lively diversity of views and trends.

Small Town Confronts Big Discrimination Penalty

Small Town Confronts Big Discrimination Penalty

GENENTECH'S CANCER TRIALS

GENENTECH FACED SIGNIFicant ups and downs in its cancer drug development efforts last week. It successfully defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Chiron over the breast cancer drug Herceptin. But only a few days later, Genentech announced that one of its promising oncology products failed to show efficacy in clinical trials. Chiron originally sued Genentech in June 2000, alleging that Herceptin infringed a Chiron patent covering monoclonal antibodies that bind selectively to human breast cancer cells. Herceptin is a monoclonal antibody that blocks the overproduction of the HER2 protein by tumor cells. A California district court jury found Chiron's patent to be invalid. As a result, Genentech will not have to pay royalties to Chiron. Herceptin sales reached $182 million in the first half of 2002, up 13.5% from last year, and total more than $1 billion since the drug's launch in September 1998. Chiron is expected to fight ...

Sharp v Port Kembla RSL Club: establishing causation of laryngeal cancer by environmental tobacco smoke.

A New South Wales Supreme Court jury has decided that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) can cause or materially contribute to the development of laryngeal cancer. Evidence presented that ETS may cause or materially contribute to laryngeal cancer included the molecular genetics of tobacco-smoke-induced carcinogenesis, and two relevant epidemiological studies. The plaintiff's exposure to ETS was established indirectly, on the basis of occupational history involving work as a bar attendant in licensed premises. The jury's decision seems likely to encourage other "passive smoking" cases, and may result in measures to reduce occupational exposure to ETS.

Judging jury service: results of the North Carolina administrative office of the courts juror survey.

This study examined venirepersons' and jurors' levels of satisfaction with jury service. Surveys were distributed to all persons who reported for state court jury service during two one-week periods in each North Carolina county. Questions concerned satisfaction with various aspects of jury service, the effects of service, hardships experienced, details of and reactions to cases heard, and basic demographic information. Responses were obtained from 82 of the 100 counties and 4,654 venirepersons (of whom 1,478 served as jurors). Consistent with prior research on juror experiences, results generally revealed high levels of satisfaction and positive opinions about various aspects of jury service. Service did not influence opinions about the courts for most respondents, and those whose opinions changed tended to become more positive about jury service. Suggestions for future research emphasize giving higher priority to publishing unpublished research on jury experience, explaining the high satisfaction levels observed in samples of jurors, and examining the impact of trial reform on juror satisfaction levels.

Appeal from jury or judge trial: defendants' advantage

The prevailing “expert” opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Using a database that combines all federal civil trials and appeals decided since 1988, we find that jury trials, as a group, are in fact not so special on appeal. But the data do show that defendants succeed more than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials, and especially from jury trials. Defendants appealing their losses after trial by jury obtain reversals at a 31% rate, while losing plaintiffs succeed in only 13% oftheir appeals f rom jury trials. Both descriptive analyses ofthe results and more formal regression models dispel explanations based on selection of cases and instead support an explanation based on appellate judges’ attitudes toward trial-level adjudicators. That is, these attitudes make the appellate court more favorably disposed to the defendant than are the trial judge and the jury. The especially large difference between appellate court and trial jury dispositions probably stems from the appellate judges’ sizable misperceptions about the jury.

Assessing the Potential Impact of the Proposed Hague Jurisdiction and Judgments Convention on Human Rights Litigation in the United States

On September 25, 2000, a Manhattan jury in federal court ordered former Bosnian Serb wartime leader Radovan Karadzic to pay $4.5 billion in damages to victims of war crimes committed in the early 1990s war in the former Yugoslavia. A few weeks earlier, another New York jury rendered a judgment against Karadzic for $745 million in a lawsuit focusing on crimes against women in the war. Despite the seriousness of the cases and the size of the judgments, the plaintiffs may never collect even a portion of the judgments because of the difficulty of enforcement in foreign countries, where Karadzic is more likely to have his assets. While one of the plaintiffs explained that the verdict was less about money and more about exposing the atrocities of the war, other similar judgments have been only symbolic gestures as well, because plaintiffs were unable to collect. One of the impediments preventing the Karadzic plaintiffs from collecting is the probability that many foreign countries where Karadzic might have assets would refuse to recognize or enforce the judgments. While the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution requires that judgments rendered in one state be

Appeal from Jury or Judge Trial: Defendants' Advantage

The prevailing expert opinion is that jury verdicts are largely immune to appellate revision. Using a database that includes all federal civil trials and appeals since 1988, we find that civil jury trials as a group are not so special on appeal. But the data do show that defendants succeed more than plaintiffs on appeal from civil trials, and especially from jury trials. Defendants appealing their losses after trial by jury obtain reversals at a 31% rate, while losing plaintiffs succeed in only 13% of their appeals from jury trials. Both descriptive analyses of the results and more formal regression models support an explanation based on appellate judges' attitudes toward trial-level adjudicators. The appellate court is more favorable to the defendant than is the trial judge and especially the jury. The large difference between appellate court and trial jury stems from the appellate judges' sizable misperceptions about the jury.

Jury says Monsanto unit infringed gene patent

Rhune-Poulenc Agro (RPA) has chalked up a second win in its lawsuit against DeKalb Genetics, a seed company owned by Monsanto. A federal district court jury in Greensboro, N.C., has found that DeKalb infringed an RPA patent and misappropriated trade secrets related to Roundup Ready corn, which is tolerant to Monsanto's glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup. RPA says its patent covers the optimized transit peptide, a genetic construct that along with another RPA gene imparts glyphosate tolerance. The trade secrets involved gene constructs for which patents are pending. In April, the jury hearing the first phase of the case awarded RPA, a Lyons, France-based subsidiary of Rhune-Poulenc, $15 million in actual damages and $50 million in punitive damages after finding, according to RPA, that DeKalb had fraudulently induced RPA to license the gene technology and breached agreements to share test results. A second jury was then convened to resolve the accusations of patent infringement and theft ...

Titans clash over biotech licenses

Monsanto and San Diego-based Mycogen are at it again. A California jury has awarded Mycogen $175 million in damages as a result of Monsanto's foot-dragging on granting a license for its technology for genetically engineering insect-and herbicide- resistant plants. We are gratified that the jury has held Monsanto accountable for the negative impact the delay in receiving this technology has had on our seed business, says Carl Eibl, president of a biotechnology and agribusiness company 69% owned by Dow Chemical. Monsanto is not taking the San Diego Superior Court jury's decision lying down. We will immediately seek to have this award set aside, [because] no past or future damages were suffered by Mycogen, says David Snively, assistant general counsel for Monsanto. At the center of the dispute is enabling biotechnology that allows the creation of a whole new generation of crops. Monsanto has technology that enables insertion of modified Bacillus thuringiensis ...

Readings and Hearings in French Criminal Justice: Five Cases in the Tribunal Correctionnel

In a recent issue of this Journal I examined in some detail the processing of a murder case in the French criminal justice system.1 Many anglophone lawyers will in any event know something of the players and procedures involved in the processing of serious criminal cases in the French system, such as the examining magistrate or investigating judge (juge d'instruction) and the jury court (cour d'assises) consisting of judges and jurors sitting and deliberating together. Less seems to be known by anglophone lawyers, however, about the way in which less serious criminal cases are dealt with in France. These are predominantly dealt with through a hearing in the tribunal correctionnel after an investigation by the judicial police. As part of my interest over the past decade in the French criminal justice system I have sat through many days of hearing in the tribunaux correctionnels, noting what was transpiring. To understand properly what happens at the hearing of a case in France it is necessary to read the dossier in which the investigation in the case is recorded. Thus, with permission of the prosecutors concerned, I read the dossiers of some of the cases I had sat through. What follows is an account of five of the cases I have so studied. The object of this exercise is to present to an anglophone readership an account of how run-of-the-mill cases are dealt with by the French criminal justice system.2 This may be useful to comparative lawyers seeking a better understanding of standard French procedures rather than of just the deluxe procedures used in more serious cases. This may also assist in providing a more substantial basis for considering what, if any, procedures from the French criminal justice system might beneficially be transplanted into anglophone or common law systems.3

Do patients want to talk to their physicians about organ donation? Attitudes and knowledge about organ donation: a study of Orange County, California residents.

This study surveyed Orange County, California residents to determine their attitudes and knowledge about organ donation and in particular to determine what factors influence the decision to donate one's organs upon death. Respondents were recruited from the Orange County Superior Court jury pool (N = 378). Each completed a 44 item questionnaire. Findings from the analysis of Questionnaire Data reveal that nearly three-quarters of respondents had considered donating their organs, yet less than one-third had made arrangements to donate. Having an accurate knowledge about organ donation and being willing to accept a donated organ were particularly robust factors associated with the likelihood to donate. Having spoken with a physician was also a positive factor, yet just 5% of the sample had done so, and two-thirds of respondents did not want to discuss organ donation with their physician. The study's findings suggest that enhanced recruitment may be achieved by focusing on education (especially increased emphasis on the family's role) and by targeting both parents and their children. Finally, although physicians are encouraged to discuss organ donation with patients, more information is needed to explain why patients may not want to talk about this topic with their doctors.

5. In the Presence of a Petition by the Accused Concerning the Consideration of the Case by a Jury Court, the Judge, in Accordance with the Requirements of Article 431 of the Criminal Procedure code of the RSFSR, Is Obligated to Appoint the Case for Court Examination through the Procedure of a Preliminary Hearing

"5. In the Presence of a Petition by the Accused Concerning the Consideration of the Case by a Jury Court, the Judge, in Accordance with the Requirements of Article 431 of the Criminal Procedure code of the RSFSR, Is Obligated to Appoint the Case for Court Examination through the Procedure of a Preliminary Hearing." Statutes and Decisions, 31(6), pp. 71–72