Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Juries (2)
- Jury decision making (2)
- Jury reforms (2)
- Lay judges (2)
- Active jury reforms (1)
-
- Adversary system (1)
- Arizona jury reform (1)
- Civil trials (1)
- Deliberative democracy (1)
- East Asian Law and Society Conference (1)
- Expert testimony (1)
- Japan (1)
- Judge MtDNA Study (1)
- Jury MtDNA Study (1)
- Jury Trial Innovations (1)
- Jury competence (1)
- Jury comprehension of scientific evidence (1)
- Jury deliberations (1)
- Jury trial discussions (1)
- Jury trial innovations (1)
- Korean Jury Law (1)
- Lay adjudication (1)
- Lay participation in law (1)
- Legal decision-making (1)
- Mitochondrial DNA (1)
- Mixed tribunals (1)
- MtDNA evidence (1)
- Saiban-in Seido (1)
- Saiban-in seido (1)
- Scientific evidence (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Judges
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The View Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula Hannaford-Agor, G. Thomas Munsterman
Valerie P. Hans
In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of a field experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experiences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawback of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority of judges …
Special Feature: The Future Of Lay Adjudication In Korea And Japan, Hiroshi Fukurai, Valerie P. Hans
Special Feature: The Future Of Lay Adjudication In Korea And Japan, Hiroshi Fukurai, Valerie P. Hans
Valerie P. Hans
Three years after Korea introduced the jury system for the first time in its history, and two years following the Japanese introduction of a mixed court in which citizen and professional judges decide serious criminal cases, the Second East Asian Law and Society Conference was held on September 30th and October 1st, 2011 in the vibrant city of Seoul, South Korea. This Special Issue of the Yonsei Law Journal offers an opportunity to present work on some of the key issues that were discussed and debated at this remarkable conference. In particular, the special issue offers new research on the …
Japan's New Lay Judge System: Deliberative Democracy In Action?, Zachary Corey, Valerie P. Hans
Japan's New Lay Judge System: Deliberative Democracy In Action?, Zachary Corey, Valerie P. Hans
Valerie P. Hans
No abstract provided.
U.S. Jury Reform: The Active Jury And The Adversarial Ideal, Valerie P. Hans
U.S. Jury Reform: The Active Jury And The Adversarial Ideal, Valerie P. Hans
Valerie P. Hans
In many countries, lay people participate as decision makers in legal cases. Some countries include their citizens in the justice system as lay judges or jurors, who assess cases independently. The legal systems of other nations combine lay and law-trained judges who decide cases together in mixed tribunals. The International Conference on Lay Participation in the Criminal Trial in the 21st Century provided useful contrasts among different methods of incorporating lay voices into criminal justice systems worldwide. Systems with inquisitorial methods are more likely to employ mixed courts, whereas adversarial systems more often use juries. Research presented at the Conference …
Judges, Juries, And Scientific Evidence, Valerie P. Hans
Judges, Juries, And Scientific Evidence, Valerie P. Hans
Valerie P. Hans
The rise in scientific evidence offered in American jury trials, along with court rulings thrusting judges into the business of assessing the soundness of scientific evidence, have produced challenges for judge and jury alike. Many judges have taken up the duty of becoming “amateur scientists.” But what about juries? Surely they too could benefit from assistance as they attempt to master and apply complex testimony about scientific matters during the course of a trial. Concerns about the jury’s ability to understand, critically evaluate, and employ scientific evidence in deciding complex trials have led to many suggestions for reform. This article …