Amidst growing concern about jurors doing online research about cases on which they serve, judges and judicial groups have sought new ways to deter this behavior. They have expanded jury instructions on the issue, elicited signed pledges from jurors, and threatened or even imposed sanctions for violators.
Two recent efforts are noteworthy, one fairly traditional and the other quite creative. On the traditional side, a Judicial Conference Committee updated the Read Full Article >
Judge Shira A. Scheindlin (US v. Viktor Bout, 2011) turned to jurors’ pledges to stop jurors from researching cases online. Her hope was that having jurors sign pledges promising not to research a case online (or elsewhere) would make their oaths more salient and stop jurors from conducting online research. It probably did not hurt that those who signed the pledge faced perjury charges if they did not honor it.
No one knows whether a written pledge will keep jurors more faithful than an oral one....Read Full Article >
When you want to know what people think, why not just ask them? Seems simple, right? It would be, if it worked.
In April, psychiatrist Robert Spitzer retracted his study in which he had alleged that homosexuals could convert to heterosexuals. He stated that he had erred in relying on supposedly converted people’s self-reported stories of their conversions without taking into account of a myriad of conscious and unconscious reasons (such as desire to convert, political reasons, faulty memory of...Read Full Article >
A version of this article was originally published in Executive Counsel Magazine’s June / July 2012 Edition. You can read the article on their website here.By Roy Futterman, Ph.D., Director, DOAR Litigation Consulting
When preparing for the defense of a labor and employment case that is headed toward trial, companies are often faced with a common problem: The defense is based on the testimony of a variety of employees, most of whom are disinterested in the trial and appalled at the...Read Full Article >