Here are some of the studies comparing six-and twelve-person juries which were cited by the Court in Ballew :. Critics have wondered why Blackmun did not overturn the holding in Williams given the social science evidence that six-person juries do not deliberate as well as twelve-person juries. As Shari Diamond puts it, the jury is supposed to be a representative sample of the community. The question becomes one of degree; specifically, how much less representative of a community population is a jury of six likely to be than a jury of twelve?
Many observers expressed surprise at the homogeneity of the Zimmerman jury. Modern empirical sampling theory demonstrates that juries of six members are much more susceptible to outlier effects, such as an all-female jury.
The chart below shows a normally distributed, randomly drawn jury sample and the deviation from the mean of those juries in terms of the number of women. The less peaked distribution for six-member juries is a visual depiction of samples with a greater chance of outliers than those for twelve-member juries, which cluster around the female population mean. Six-member juries can produce clearly visible effects that would be remotely unlikely in a twelve-member jury. In a twelve-member jury, however, that chance drops to less than.
Other minority groups present in the community also demonstrate much greater chance of representation in the jury as its size increases, and it may be presumed, while it is much more difficult to categorize than race or ethnicity, that a broad array of experiences and backgrounds are also better represented. Michael Saks has studied view representativeness at length, and he finds that as jury size decreases, verdict and award unpredictability increase.
Verdict and award predictability is significant if we assume that the overall population has a distinct view of the correct verdict and award amount. Since twelve-member juries tend to reduce outlier awards and conform more strictly to the mean population verdict decision and award than six-member juries, twelve-member juries are more representative of their community in the trial outcome reached. For reference, the visual effect of jury size on a normal distribution of awards is shown below, although the actual curve varies somewhat from the standard normal distribution.
In , Michael Saks whose empirical work influenced the Ballew opinion and Mollie Marti conducted a meta-analysis of 17 studies that examined the differences between six- and twelve-person juries. For the most part, this study confirmed the empirical work presented in Ballew. Saks and Marti found that larger juries were more likely to contain members of minority groups, have a hung jury, and accurately recall trial testimony an indicator of juror accuracy.
Modern research on this topic has continued to examine how having juries with diverse racial compositions affects jury deliberation. Some researchers hypothesized that minority jurors would be less likely to participate in less-diverse groups, but at least one study showed that diversity did not affect the participation levels of minority jurors. Cornwell, York, and Hans analyzed data from 2, jurors on criminal cases in four jurisdictions to consider what conditions influence participation in jury deliberations.
Regional Reporting. Death Penalty. Juvenile Justice. Mental Health. Politics and Reform. About Us. Updated p. Before you go The latest on coronavirus and the justice system. The votes of just 61 Florida Representatives and 21 Florida Senators will finally bring Florida from the 19th century into the 21st century Florida , U. When Florida prosecutors finally have to convince 12 jurors of guilt as in the rest of America, prison costs will plunge as weak cases are dropped and realistic, fiscally responsible plea deals are made.
It is not soft on crime to require Florida prosecutors to prove their charges to 12 jurors at trial, as prosecutors in the other states and Federal courts do every day. Furthermore, while constitutional law requires a jury pool to be a fair cross-section of a community, the use of only six jurors at trial acts to systematically and statistically exclude or limit black citizens from actually sitting on a jury. Defendant, we would have just loved to have had a black juror for your trial, but as you can see — one, two, three, four, five, six — the jury box is full.
That excuse would not work with 12 jurors. It is statistically impossible to seat racially diverse juries when there are only six seats in a jury box; a dangerously unjust game of musical chairs. If there is room at the front of the bus, there should be room at the front of the box. In , the U. Supreme Court ruled in Thompson v. Utah that the Constitution requires a jury to be comprised of exactly twelve persons.
0コメント