Law Commons^™

Juries, Lay Judges, And Trials, Toby S. Goldbach, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers

“Juries, Lay Judges, and Trials” describes the widespread practice of including ordinary citizens as legal decision makers in the criminal trial. In some countries, lay persons serve as jurors and determine the guilt and occasionally the punishment of the accused. In others, citizens decide cases together with professional judges in mixed decision-making bodies. What is more, a number of countries have introduced or reintroduced systems employing juries or lay judges, often as part of comprehensive reform in emerging democracies. Becoming familiar with the job of the juror or lay citizen in a criminal trial is thus essential for understanding contemporary …

The Twenty-First Century Jury: Worst Of Times Or Best Of Times?, Valerie P. Hans

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In thinking about legal developments, new research findings, and the continuing swirl of controversy over this venerable American institution, I observe the same paradoxical condition that Charles Dickens found in 18th Century London: "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times." There is evidence of both the expansion of jury trial rights, yet contraction of jury trials. Research evidence indicates that juries perform well, yet the 21st Century jury confronts more complex decision making tasks and continuing doubts about its fairness and competence.

Tyranny On Trial: Personality And Courtroom Conduct Of Defendants Slobodan Milosevic And Saddam Hussein, Jerrold M. Post, Lara K. Panis

Cornell International Law Journal

In this essay in the Symposium on Milosevic & Hussein on Trial, the author explores the impacts of personality & courtroom conduct in trial outcome to argue that the likenesses between the two defendants will result in Saddam's projection of grand defiance. Biographical narratives of the two leaders trace the psychological development of each personality through childhood to their political careers characterized by defiant resistance & compensatory grandiosity that may be the source of the similarities of behaviors in the courtroom. Asserting that Saddam is following the Milosevic model of courtroom behavior by derailment of the proceeding, exploitation of the …

Styles Of Pragmatism, Social Science And The Law, Robert P. Burns

Pragmatism, Law and Governmentality

I have long held as an ideal the words of one of foremost American interpreters of John Dewey's philosophy: "An adequate, comprehensive political and social theory must be at once empirical, interpretive, and critical." How these styles of social inquiry, whose practitioners often seem at war, might cohere has never been completely clear. This essay is an attempt to work out in a very limited context some of the issues surrounding these relationships. In particular, I want to explore the relationship between the interpretive style, which I take to be central, and the other two. The focus of these remarks …

Litigation Realities, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

After both summarizing recent empirical work and presenting new observations on each of the six phases of a civil lawsuit (forum, pretrial, settlement, trial, judgment, and appeal), the authors draw a series of lessons for understanding and using empirical methods in the study of the legal system's operation. In so doing, they generate implications for current and projected policy debates concerning litigation, while identifying areas that demand further empirical work.

A Comparative View Of Standards Of Proof, Kevin M. Clermont, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In common-law systems, the standard of proof for ordinary civil cases requires the party who bears the burden of proof to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the facts alleged are true. In contrast, the prevailing standard of proof for civil cases in civil-law systems is indistinguishable from the standard for criminal cases: the judge must be firmly convinced that the facts alleged are true. This striking difference in common-law and civil-law procedures has received very little attention from either civilian or comparative scholars.

The preponderance standard applied in common-law systems is openly probabilistic and produces, on average, …