Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 12:35 am
Time: 12:35 am
Results for trials
15 results foundAuthor: Roos, Mari-Ann Title: Analysis of the Criminal Justice System of Albania: Report by the Fair Trial Development Project Summary: This analysis of the criminal justice system of Albania addresses the following issues: rights during pre-trial detention; rights to an effective defense; two case studies (Revenge for Albania Justice Case and a corruption case); domestic violence and the criminal justice system; transparency and access to information; and efficient trails and witness issues. Details: Tirana, Albania: OSCE, 2006. 245p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2006 Country: Albania URL: Shelf Number: 111760 Keywords: CorruptionDomestic ViolenceDue ProcessPretrial DetentionTrials |
Author: Flower, Shawn M. Title: Disparities in Jury Outcomes: Baltimore City vs. Three Surrounding Jurisdictions - An Empirical Examination Summary: Do juries in Baltimore City convict defendants at different rates than juries in other jurisdictions? This is the question answered by the current study, which examined a total of 293 cases – a random sample of 98 cases from Baltimore City of all cases where a jury trial was prayed or scheduled in fiscal year 2006 (July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006) and all cases disposed by jury trial in Anne Arundel (85 cases), Baltimore (78 cases) and Howard Counties (32 cases) from July 1, 2005 through December 31, 2006. Details: Baltimore, MD: Abell Foundation, 2008. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2010 at: http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/Disparities-cj.908.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.abell.org/pubsitems/Disparities-cj.908.pdf Shelf Number: 113576 Keywords: DefendantsJuriesTrials |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: Jury Discrimination in Criminal Trials Summary: This paper examines the impact of jury racial composition on trial outcomes using a unique dataset of all felony trials in Sarasota County, Florida between 2004 and 2009. We utilize a research design that exploits day-to-day variation in the composition of the jury pool to isolate quasi-random variation in the composition of the seated jury. We find strong evidence that all-white juries acquit whites more often and are less favorable to black versus white defendants when compared to juries with at least one black member. Using the Anwar-Fang rank order test, we find strong statistical evidence of discrimination on the basis of defendant race. These results are consistent with racial prejudice on the part of white jurors, black jurors, or both. Using a simple model of jury selection and decision-making, we replicate the entire set of empirical regularities observed in the data, including the fact that blacks in the jury pool are just as likely as whites to be seated. Simulations of the model suggest that jurors of each race are heterogeneous in the standards of evidence that they require to convict and that both black and white defendants would prefer to face jurors of the same race. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2010. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper Series; Working Paper 16366: Accessed October 5, 2010 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16366.pdf Shelf Number: 119863 Keywords: CourtsDiscriminationJuriesJurorsTrials |
Author: Bertrand, Lorne D. Title: Juror Stress Debriefing: A Review of the Literature and an Evaluation of a Yukon Program Summary: In 2005, the Yukon Department of Justice received funding from Justice Canada to set up a pilot project to research the jury experience in the Yukon during the course of homicide trials that were expected to take place during the following two years. The intent of the project was to evaluate the effectiveness of providing jury debriefing sessions in mitigating stress that jurors may experience as a result of serving on these juries. The study would contribute to the modernization of the justice system in the north and in small communities by providing valuable information about the impact on jurors of the experience of being involved in long and complex trials. The project examined the stresses that Canadian jurors experience when they sit on trials that are lengthy, complex and that contain large volumes of information that may often be disturbing. It considered what kinds of assistance might be appropriate to debrief juries so that they could deal effectively with emotionally distressing information to which they were exposed during the course of the trial. The project also examined the particular stresses that inhabitants of small communities with a significant Aboriginal population experience as a result of sitting on juries in those communities. A further aspect of the project was to look at the limits of doing research on juries in Canada given the restrictions set out in s. 649 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Details: Calgary, Alberta: Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family, 2008. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2011 at: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Jury_Stress_Final_Report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Canada URL: http://people.ucalgary.ca/~crilf/publications/Jury_Stress_Final_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 120886 Keywords: CourtsJuriesJurors (Canada)Trials |
Author: Davey, Christopher Title: New Media and the Courts: The Current Status and a Look at the Future Summary: Recently, jurors in a Florida drug case conducted independent Internet research causing the judge to declare a mistrial. In Arkansas, a juror‘s Twitter updates from the courtroom nearly scuttled the proceedings involving a multimillion-dollar civil judgment. From Twitter to Facebook to YouTube and Wikipedia, new Web-based digital media is transforming how citizens process information, and courts are beginning to examine the impact on a wide variety of their core functions. The Conference of Court Public Information Officers (CCPIO) undertook a yearlong, collaborative national research project to systematically examine this phenomenon and analyze its potential effects on the judiciary. The CCPIO New Media Project has five primary objectives:(1) clearly define the current technology, (2) systematically examine the ways courts use the technology, (3) empirically measure the perceptions of judges and top court administrators toward the technology, (4) collect and analyze the literature on public perceptions of the judiciary and court public outreach programs and (5) offer a framework and analysis for judges and court administrators to use for making decisions about the appropriate use of new media. Among the technologies examined are social media profile sites; smart phones, tablets and notebooks; news categorizing, sharing and syndication technologies; and visual media sharing sites. Government sectors at all levels are experimenting with many of these technologies hoping their collaborative capabilities can transform the relationship between governmental entities and their constituents. These new and emerging digital media technologies offer great potential; simultaneously there are significant inherent challenges specific to the judiciary. Ramifications range from the ability to ensure fair trials to building trust and confidence through public outreach and communication. Details: The Conference of Court Public Information Officers, 2010. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 18, 2011 at: http://www.ccpio.org/documents/newmediaproject/New-Media-and-the-Courts-Report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.ccpio.org/documents/newmediaproject/New-Media-and-the-Courts-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 121384 Keywords: CommunicationsCourts and the MediaInformation TechnologyPublic InformationTrials |
Author: Great Britain. Law Commission Title: Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales Summary: This project addressed the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings in England and Wales. In a criminal trial, a jury or magistrates' court is required to determine disputed factual issues. Experts in a relevant field are often called as witnesses to help the fact-finding body understand and interpret evidence with which that body is unfamiliar. The current judicial approach to the admissibility of expert evidence in England and Wales is one of laissez-faire. Too much expert opinion evidence is admitted without adequate scrutiny because no clear test is being applied to determine whether the evidence is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. This problem is exacerbated in two ways: •First, because expert evidence (particularly scientific evidence) will often be technical and complex, jurors will understandably lack the experience to be able to assess the reliability of such evidence. There is a danger that they may simply defer to the opinion of the specialist who has been called to provide expert evidence. •Secondly, in the absence of a clear legal test to ensure the reliability of expert evidence, advocates do not always cross-examine experts effectively to reveal potential flaws in the experts' methodology, data and reasoning. Juries may therefore be reaching conclusions on the basis of unreliable evidence. This conclusion is confirmed by a number of miscarriages of justice in recent years. Details: London: The Stationery Office, 2011. 219p. Source: Internet Resource: HC 829: Accessed May 4, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/docs/lc325_Expert_Evidence_Report.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/lawcommission/docs/lc325_Expert_Evidence_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 121612 Keywords: CourtsCriminal EvidenceExpert Witnesses (U.K.)Trials |
Author: Gogia, Giorgi Title: Administrative Error: Georgia’s Flawed System for Administrative Detention Summary: Georgian authorities have used the Code of Administrative Offenses in recent years to lock up protestors and activists at times of political tension. The code allows for a person to be imprisoned for up to 90 days for certain administrative offenses, or misdemeanors. However, as this report describes, the code lacks due process and fair trial protections required for punishment of this severity. It does not explicitly require that police promptly inform defendants of their rights or give reasons for their detention. Detainees are often not allowed to contact their families, and if retained, lawyers often have difficulties in finding detainees in custody. Nor do detainees enjoy fair trial rights in court. Trials are often perfunctory, rarely last more than 15 minutes, and judicial decisions often rely exclusively on police testimonies. If lawyers are present, they lack time to prepare an effective defense. Lawyers and their clients also face obstacles exercising the right to appeal. Those handed terms of administrative imprisonment serve sentences in temporary detention isolators not intended for long-term occupancy, where conditions often fall short of international standards. As a party to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, Georgia should ensure full due process protections for administrative defendants, particularly with regard to the right to notify a third party about detention, the right to lawyer of one’s choosing, and the right to a fair trial. Details: New York: Human Rights Watch, 2012. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 10, 2012 at: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/georgia0112ForUpload.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Georgia URL: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/georgia0112ForUpload.pdf Shelf Number: 123550 Keywords: Administrative Detention (Georgia)CourtsDetentionHuman RightsMisdemeanorsPunishmentTrials |
Author: Graham, Kyle Title: Crimes, Widgets, and Plea Bargaining: An Analysis of Charge Content, Pleas, and Trials Summary: This article considers how the composition and gravamen of a charged crime can affect the parties’ willingness and ability to engage in plea bargaining. Most of the prevailing descriptions of plea bargaining ignore or discount the importance of charge content in plea negotiations. In fact, one leading commentator has likened crimes to widgets insofar as plea bargaining is concerned. In developing its counter-thesis, this article reviews seven years of federal conviction data, focusing on those crimes that produce the most and fewest trials relative to how often they are alleged; the most and fewest acquittals at trial; and the most and fewest plea bargains that involve a substantial alteration in charges. Overall, the data demonstrate that the character of and circumstances that surround a particular offense can catalyze or frustrate plea bargaining. Similar information to that utilized in and gleaned from this study, it is also argued, can and should be considered in connection with the adoption of new crimes and the re-evaluation of existing offenses. This information would provide legislatures with insight into how a proposed crime is likely to be utilized, and how current crimes are being used. Details: Unpublished, 2012. 58p. California Law Review, Forthicoming. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2004194 Year: 0 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2004194 Shelf Number: 124611 Keywords: ConvictionsLegislationPlea BargainingProsecutorial DiscretionProsecutorsTrials |
Author: Dogru, Osman Title: "Mills that Grind Defendants": Criminal Justice System in Turkey from a Human Rights Perspective Summary: "Mills that Grind Defendants: Criminal Justice System in Turkey from a Human Rights Perspective”, authored by Osman Doğru delves into the problematic aspects of the criminal justice system in Turkey with a comparative approach through European Human Rights Convention’s legal framework and implementations. The report focuses on the following problematic aspects of the defendants’ rights in Turkey: detentions without indictments; prolonged pre-trial detentions and lengthy trials; prevention of defendants’ access to legal counsel and the issuance of indictments based on unlawfully obtained evidences. In addition, Osman Doğru’s report critically evaluates the treatment of this issue in the Judicial Reform Strategy, produced by the Ministry of Justice and puts forth specific policy recommendations. Details: Istanbul: TESEV (Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation) Publications, 2012. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2012 at: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=142277 Year: 2012 Country: Turkey URL: http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/?lng=en&id=142277 Shelf Number: 125664 Keywords: Criminal Justice Systems (Turkey)DefendantsHuman RightsJudicial ReformTrials |
Author: Shalom, Alexander Title: Trial and Error: A Comprehensive Study of Prosecutorial Conduct in New Jersey Summary: A comprehensive study of prosecutor error released today by the ACLU-NJ and Rutgers School of Law-Newark found low rates of errors but an alarming lack of accountability or regular training to prevent repeat lapses by New Jersey prosecutors. The report, titled “Trial and Error: A Comprehensive Study of Prosecutorial Conduct in New Jersey,” recommends changes at the state and county level and reveals a noteworthy range of error rates in individual New Jersey counties in the process. “Prosecutors have a heavy responsibility as representatives of the state, and most take their obligations extremely seriously,” said ACLU-NJ Policy Counsel Alexander Shalom, one of the authors of the report. “Because prosecutors are largely immune from civil liability, and because they represent the government’s authority, it’s both more difficult and critical to hold them accountable for mistakes that interfere with a fair trial. Without a way to hold prosecutors accountable for all but the most outrageous violations, New Jersey leaves too many opportunities for justice to slip through the cracks.” The report examined allegations of error raised on appeal in the state between 2005 and 2011, and tracked the number of case decisions reversed based on prosecutorial error and the discipline they faced if they committed multiple errors. Prosecutorial error covers a range of actions, including failure to disclose exculpatory evidence, making improper remarks to the jury, or appealing to emotion rather than facts. Most errors, according to the report, occur during summations. The report found that of the 343 prosecutors accused of committing error, not one – including the 30 prosecutors who were found to have committed multiple errors – received discipline for in-court behavior. This is a stark contrast to the discipline that other types of attorneys receive for errors. The report also revealed that the state of New Jersey has no functional system for identifying, disciplining or eliminating prosecutor error except in the most egregious cases. The report found surprising disparities in New Jersey’s counties. Warren County, for example, represented only 1.4 percent of the state’s convictions but had 5.7 percent of its harmful errors. Camden County, however, had 6.2 percent of the state’s convictions but only 3.1 percent of total errors, as well as no reversed convictions. The authors recommend mandatory reporting of error, which is only optional under the current system, making it harder for disciplinary boards to collect enough information to determine when sanctions would be appropriate. This is especially problematic in cases of serious or repeated error that do not amount to an ethical lapse. The report also recommends heightened training, supervision and discipline within prosecutors’ offices. The authors also determined that, in order to provide prosecutors with maximum guidance, courts should determine whether conduct constitutes error in every case in which the issue is raised. Defense attorneys, as well, have an important role in preventing prosecutorial error in the form of objecting during the trial. Details: Newark, NJ: American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, 2012. 44p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 21, 2012 at: http://www.aclu-nj.org/files/3213/4815/6942/ACLU-NJ_Pros_Cond_BW.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclu-nj.org/files/3213/4815/6942/ACLU-NJ_Pros_Cond_BW.pdf Shelf Number: 126400 Keywords: ProsecutionProsecutorial MisconductProsecutors (New Jersey, U.S.)Trials |
Author: Amnesty International Title: Left in the Dark: The Use of Secret Evidence in the United Kingdom Summary: Over the past decade, there has been an ever increasing reliance on secret evidence by the UK government in the name of national security. Amnesty International believes that this growing resort to secrecy undermines basic standards of fairness and open justice, can result in violations of the right to a fair trial and the right to effective remedy for victims of human rights violations, as well as contributing to failures by the UK to meet its obligations to hold those responsible for human rights violations to account and to refrain from sending people to a real risk of serious human rights violations at the hands of another state. This report examines the increased use of what is described as a “closed material procedure”, which allows the government to rely on secret evidence presented to the court behind closed doors, in a range of non-criminal judicial proceedings in the UK. Closed material procedures are usually invoked in cases involving persons suspected of terrorismrelated activity. Such a procedure allows a court or tribunal to sit in a closed (i.e. secret) hearing in order to consider material presented by UK authorities. Closed material is information that the government claims would be damaging to national security or otherwise harmful to the public interest if it were to be disclosed. This material is withheld for the entire case (and indeed perhaps forever) from the individual(s) whose interests are at stake in the case, her/his lawyer of choice, and the public, none of whom has access to the closed hearing.1 As a result of their exclusion from the closed hearing, they do not know the content of that material, even though the court can rely on it to determine the facts and outcome of the case. “Closed material” is essentially a form of secret evidence and marks a radical departure from what traditionally are understood to be basic requirements of fairness in civil and criminal procedures. Details: London: Amnesty International Publications, 2012. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 19, 2012 at: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/EUR45/014/2012/en/546a2059-db83-4888-93ba-8b90cc32a2de/eur450142012en.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/EUR45/014/2012/en/546a2059-db83-4888-93ba-8b90cc32a2de/eur450142012en.pdf Shelf Number: 126758 Keywords: Evidence (U.K.)National SecurityTerrorismTrials |
Author: Westera, Nina Title: Using Video Recorded Police Interviews to get the Full Story from Complainants in Rape Trials Summary: This Briefing Paper focuses on the importance of complainant testimony in achieving just outcomes in rape trials. The authors undertake a comparative analysis of rape trials, and the types of information elicited during police interviews with complainants, to that provided during evidence-in-chief at trial. The study’s findings indicate that current approaches during trials may lead to potentially important information being excluded. The authors highlight the need for further research into whether pre-recorded interviews with complainants may assist in jury deliberations. Details: Nathan, QLD: ARC Centre of Excellence in Policing and Security, 2012. 4p. Source: ARC CEPS Briefing Paper, Issue 17: Internet Resource: Accessed December 2, 2012 at http://www.ceps.edu.au/CMS/Uploads/file/Nina%20Westera%20issue%2017%20WEB.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.ceps.edu.au/CMS/Uploads/file/Nina%20Westera%20issue%2017%20WEB.pdf Shelf Number: 127103 Keywords: Police Interviews, Video RecordingRapeTrials |
Author: Anwar, Shamena Title: The Role of Age in Jury Selection and Trial Outcomes Summary: This paper uses data from 700 felony trials in Sarasota and Lake Counties in Florida from 2000-2010 to examine the role of age in jury selection and trial outcomes. The results imply that prosecutors are more likely to use their peremptory challenges to exclude younger members of the jury pool, while defense attorneys exclude older potential jurors. To examine the causal impact of age on trial outcomes, the paper employs a research design that isolates the effect of the random variation in the age composition of the pool of eligible jurors called for jury duty. Consistent with the jury selection patterns, the empirical evidence implies that older jurors are significantly more likely to convict. Results are robust to the inclusion of broad set of controls including county, time, and judge fixed effects. These findings imply that many cases are decided differently for reasons that are completely independent of the true nature of the evidence in the case – i.e., that there is substantial randomness in the application of criminal justice. Details: Durham, NC: Duke University, 2013. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Economic Research Initiatives at Duke (ERID) Working Paper No. 146: Accessed May 29, 2013 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2266613 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2266613 Shelf Number: 128846 Keywords: CourtsFeloniesJurorsJury SelectionTrials |
Author: Wan, Wai Yin Title: Forecasting trial delay in the NSW District Criminal Court: an update Summary: Aim: To develop a statistical model which enables court administrators to determine the future impact on trial court delay of changes in the backlog of pending trials. Method: Data on the size of the pending caseload between January 2011 and June 2016 were drawn from records held by the NSW District Criminal Court Registry. Data on mean and median delay between committal for trial and trial finalisation over the same time period were drawn from records held by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Changes in the mean and median time between committal for trial and case finalisation were linked to changes in the size of the pending trial caseload using polynomial distributed lags modelling (a special form of distributed lags model). Results: The long run effect of a 10 per cent increase (decrease) in the size of the pending trial caseload is a 5.73 per cent increase (decrease) in the mean time between committal for trial and trial finalisation and a 6.08 per cent increase (decrease) in the median time between committal for trial and trial finalisation. Conclusion: Changes in the number of pending trial cases can be used to forecast changes in the time taken to finalise criminal cases in the NSW District Criminal Court. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue paper no. 122: Accessed May 4, 2017 at: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/bocsar_forecastingtrialdelayinthenswdistrictcriminalcourt_apr_2017.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/bocsar_forecastingtrialdelayinthenswdistrictcriminalcourt_apr_2017.pdf Shelf Number: 145303 Keywords: Court Delay Criminal Courts Trials |
Author: Dawson, Justin C. Title: Strategies to Mitigate the Impact of Electronic Communication and Electronic Devices on the Right to a Fair Trial Summary: he proliferation of electronic communication and electronic devices throughout modern society presents new challenges to the judicial system in protecting the right to a fair trial. Electronic communication, including texts, emails, blogs, social network posts, and other information accessed through the Internet, provides opportunities to expose confidential witnesses or informants, intimidate witnesses and victims from testifying, and bias jurors. Electronic devices can be used to record an image of a witness, identify that witness and expose him or her on the Internet, or communicate with a juror in an attempt to influence the outcome of a case. Jurors may also compromise their own independence by using electronic devices to access or share information about trial proceedings before the case is resolved. Court practices to protect the right to a fair trial have not kept pace with rapidly evolving electronic communication and devices, and traditional approaches to identify and protect against witness intimidation and to preserve juror impartiality are likely insufficient in the face of their near universal use, which facilitates access to information about nearly anything and anyone. On behalf of the National Institute of Justice, the Priority Criminal Justice Needs Initiative convened a panel, including judges, lawyers, educators, and other experts, to identify ways that electronic communication can impact the right to a fair trial and to recommend strategies to protect witnesses from intimidation and jurors from compromising their independence. The panel proceedings and recommendations are presented in this report. Key Findings Judges Should Have Authority to Use Their Own Discretion to Find Solutions for Their Courtrooms Legislation may help mitigate some of the problems introduced by electronic communication, but judges need discretion in their own courtrooms. Judges and attorneys need flexibility in engaging with jurors, who are used to communicating electronically throughout the day but must be limited during trial proceedings. Electronic Device Bans in the Courtroom Are Viewed as Effective in Mitigating Witness Intimidation However, jury sequestration to minimize or eliminate misconduct with electronic communication is considered to be generally impractical and counterproductive. More Public Education Would Clarify the Importance of Due Process and How Electronic and Social Media Communication May Violate the Constitutional Rights of Defendants and Other Parties to a Case Continuing education is also needed for the judiciary and court practitioners on evolving modes of electronic communication. Recommendations Undertake fundamental research on how the exploding volume of electronic data could affect the protection of rights. Develop methods to better assess the effect on the judicial process of jurors' "outside research" during trials. Identify approaches both to limit juror use of mobile devices to do "outside research" during trials and to educate jurors on this issue. Develop methods to monitor juror and defendant social media activity, given concerns about the use of social media to influence judicial processes. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2018. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2018 at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2155.html Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2155.html Shelf Number: 150365 Keywords: InternetJuriesOnline CommunicationsSocial MediaTrials |