| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Jury research ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Jury research
Jury or juror research is an umbrella term for the use of research methods in an attempt to gain some understanding of the juror experience in the courtroom and how jurors individually and collectively come to a determination about the 'guilt' or otherwise of the accused.
==Brief history==
Historically, juries have played a significant role in the determination of issues that could not be managed via 'general social interactions' or ones which required punitive measures, retribution and/or compensation. The role of jurors and juries however, has changed over the centuries and have generally been moulded by social and cultural forces embedded in the wider communities in which they have evolved.〔(C.R. (2007). Symbolism in the Courtroom: An examination of the influence of non-verbal cues in a District Court Setting on juror ability to focus on the evidence.VDM: Germany )〕 "Although the role of juries and jurors has a somewhat chequeured history, 'the jury, in one form or the other, became the formal method of proof of the guilt or () of a person on trial"",〔〔(), (1985), Brisbane, Author.〕 and juries remain one of the 'cornerstones' of the criminal justice system in many countries.〔(M. (1988) The role of the jury in a fair trial. In M. Findlay & P. Duff (Eds.). The jury under attack (pp. 140-160). North Ryde. Butterworths )〕
There are however, many debates about the efficacy of the jury system and the ability of jurors to adequately determine the guilt or otherwise of the accused. Some argue that lay individuals are incapable of digesting the often complex forensic evidence presented during a trial, others argue that any misunderstanding of the evidence is a flaw in legal cross examination and summing up. Many observe that the juror and the accused seldom can be considered 'peers' which is historically considered a fundamental precept of jury makeup. Others consider the jury system to be inherently flawed as a result of the humanity of jurors. They cite incidents in which the Judiciary have become aware of Juror assumptions made in the absence of supporting evidence, the unidentified effect on Jurors of stereotyping, culture, gender, age, education etc., which can and have influenced their ability to make a decision from an objective stance. These arguments and debates are founded in legal and psychological practice and made by social scientists and legal practitioners,〔〔(M. & Duff, P. (Eds.). (1988) The jury under attack. North Ryde. Butterworths )〕〔(JF. (1987). A presumption of wisdom: An expose of the jury system of injustice. North Ryde. Angus & Robinson )〕〔(Young, W., Cameron, N. & Tinsley, Y. (1999a) Juries in criminal trials: A discussion paper. Preliminary paper 37, Volume 1. Wellington N.Z. Law Commission )〕〔(Young, W., Cameron, N. & Tinsley, Y. (1999b) Juries in criminal trials: A summary of research findings Preliminary paper 37, Volume 2. Wellington N.Z. Law Commission )〕
The above factors are but a few of the many and varied variables that can impose on the juror when in the Courtroom and/or the Juryroom. Such a complex and unique experience is the jury deliberation process the outcome of which is profound and potentially lethal. Quite rightfully therefore, the focus on jury research by legal professionals and social scientists has become, in the last 50 years or so a burgeoning area of investigation.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Jury research」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|