Loading…
Juries in rape trials: Balanced or biased?
The most comprehensive mock trial research project on juror attitudes in rape cases has recently called into question the traditional perception of a criminal trial, that juries reach impartial verdicts based on a balanced assessment of the evidence. It will be recalled that in the UK no inquiries a...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Default Article |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/2134/19626297.v1 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The most comprehensive mock trial research project on juror attitudes in rape cases has recently called into question the traditional perception of a criminal trial, that juries reach impartial verdicts based on a balanced assessment of the evidence. It will be recalled that in the UK no inquiries are permitted of jury verdicts, and the jury do not give reasons for their verdicts. The integrity of the jury’s decision-making process is presumed; to think otherwise is to undermine the system itself. But is the system working? Is it even capable of working? The new research, carried out by Psychologists Dominic Willmott and Professor Daniel Boduszek at the University of Huddersfield, and underpinned by legal guidance from criminal barrister Nigel Booth at St John’s Buildings in Manchester, suggests that we are right to be asking such awkward questions. |
|---|