Search

With a sample of 18 capital cases tied In Kentucky, South Carolina, and California, we attempted to replicate an earlier study which showed that significantly more defense challenges/or cause were granted under conditions of sequestered, individual voir dire than when voir dire was conducted under less enhanced condition. In the cane at sample, sequestered individual voir dire again retailed in more defense removals for cause than obtained with less extent voir dire. We present data on the defense removals for cause paritioned into fin categories according to the reason for the challenge and analyze the effects of jury selection consultants on the various indices of voir dire as well as final sentence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A survey of registered voters in Fayette County, Kentucky compared the Witt and Witherspoon death qualification standards focusing primarily on the death penalty attitudes and criminal justice system orientations of excludable and death-qualified potential jurors. As expected, the Witt standard excluded significantly more potential jurors (21.2%) than did the Witherspoon standard (13.6%). The Witherspoon excludable potential Jurors were found to be more highly opposed to the death penalty and more due process oriented regarding the criminal justice system than their death-qualified counterparts. The Witt standard, however, reduced more heterogeneous exclusions. In addition, 24.1% of all respondents were found to be automatic death penalty potential Jurors (ADPs), that is, potential Jurors who stated that they would always vote for the death penalty for convicted capital defendants. Finally, the screening adequacy of the Wilt standard for potential jurors who would not follow the law, particularly for ADPs, is questioned and discussed [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of prior juror service on jury sentencing was investigated in an archival study of 143 criminal trials resulting in convictions. Trials took place over two calendar years in a state circuit court requiring jurors to serve 30-day terms. Jurors sentenced defendants in each case according to a set of guidelines determined by trial judges. The severity of the sentences imposed by jurors was rated by 101 subjects on a scale of 1 (least severe) to 100 (most severe). The results indicated that the more experienced juries gave significantly more severe sentences than did the less experienced juries. This finding was unchanged when civil court experience was considered in addition to criminal court experience. Possible interpretations of these results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]