Law Commons^™

48. Valence, Implicated Actor, And Children's Acquiescence To False Suggestions, Kyndra C. Cleveland, Jodi A. Quas, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Bill Cosby, The Lustful Disposition Exception, And The Doctrine Of Chances, Wesley Oliver

Wesley M Oliver

Beating The Prisoner At Prisoner's Dilemma: The Evidentiary Value Of A Witness's Refusal To Testify , Russell Dean Covey

Russell D. Covey

No abstract provided.

Economic Authority And The Limits Of Expertise In Antitrust Cases, John E. Lopatka, William H. Page

William H. Page

In antitrust litigation, the factual complexity and economic nature of the issues involved require the presentation of economic expert testimony in all but a few cases. This dependence on economics has increased in recent years because of the courts' narrowing of per se rules of illegality and the courts' expansion of certain areas of factual inquiry. At the same time, however, courts have limited the scope of allowable expert testimony through the methodological strictures of Daubert and its progeny and through heightened sufficiency requirements. In this Article, Professors Page and Lopatka make four important points about these judicially imposed constraints …

46. Wrongful Acquittals Of Sexual Abuse., Thomas D. Lyon, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Kelly Mcwilliams

Thomas D. Lyon

The History Of Children's Hearsay: From Old Bailey To Post-Davis, Thomas D. Lyon, Raymond Lamagna

Thomas D. Lyon

The papers in this symposium were originally prepared for the Section on Evidence of the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Association of American Law Schools.

The Productivity Of Wh- Prompts In Child Forensic Interviews, Elizabeth C, Ahern, Samantha J. Andrews, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Child witnesses are often asked wh- prompts (what, how, why, who, when, where) in forensic interviews. However, little research has examined the ways in which children respond to different wh- prompts and no previous research has investigated productivity differences among wh- prompts in investigative interviews. This study examined the use and productivity of wh- prompts in 95 transcripts of 4- to 13-year-olds alleging sexual abuse in child investigative interviews. What-how questions about actions elicited the most productive responses during both the rapport building and substantive phases. Future research and practitioner training should consider distinguishing among different wh- prompts.

45. The Productivity Of Wh- Prompts In Child Forensic Interviews., Elizabeth C, Ahern, Samantha J. Andrews, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Experts, Statistics, Science & Bad Science, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Articles, books, and other online resources relating to expert testimony with a specific focus on problems with peer review, bad science, and statistics

Posnerian Hearsay: Slaying The Discretion Dragon, Liesa L. Richter

Liesa L. Richter

Drafting New York Civil-Litigation Documents: Part Xliv—Motions For Attorney Fees Continued, Gerald Lebovits

Hon. Gerald Lebovits

No abstract provided.

Hackers Lend Hand To Consortium Defendants, Anthony Longo

Anthony Longo

Mr. Longo analyzes how the Ashley Madison hack impacts the defense of consortium claims in Illinois

Calling In The Dogs: Suspicionless Sniff Searches And Reasonable Expectations Of Privacy, 56 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 285 (2005), Cecil J. Hunt Ii

Cecil J. Hunt II

No abstract provided.

44. The Effects Of Question Repetition On Responses When Prosecutors And Defense Attorneys Question Children Alleging Sexual Abuse In Court, Samantha J. Andrews, Michael E. Lamb, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

La Selección Del Método En La Investigación Jurídica. 100 Métodos Posibles, Juan Carlos Riofrío Martínez-Villalba

Juan Carlos Riofrío Martínez-Villalba

El objeto de las presentes líneas es abrir perspectivas sobre la gran variedad de métodos de investigación que pueden usarse en la academia, evitando los reduccionismos en la selección del método. Se trabaja desde una perspectiva teórica que primero describe la esencia del método y su rol dentro de la ciencia, luego revisa sistemáticamente la multiplicidad de métodos agrupándolos bajo cinco criterios generales, para finalmente deducir cuatro propuestas generales sobre la metodología. El primer capítulo, introduce al significado del método, a su rol dentro de la ciencia y a la necesidad de su uso. El segundo capítulo inicia delineando cinco …

43. The Effects Of The Putative Confession And Parent Suggestion On Children's Disclosure Of A Minor Transgression. Legal And Criminological Psychology, Elizabeth B. Rush, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Jodi A. Quas, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

10. Ohio V. Clark: Brief Of Amicus Curiae American Professional Society On The Abuse Of Children In Support Of Petitioner., Jeremy A. Lawrence, Daniel B. Levin, Kevin L. Brady, Maria Jhai, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

Free, But Still Behind Bars: Reading The Illinois Post-Conviction Hearing Act To Allow Any Person Convicted Of A Crime To Raise A Claim Of Actual Innocence, Hugh M. Mundy

Hugh Mundy

As the number of wrongfully convicted prisoners who are subsequently exonerated continues to rise, the importance of access to post-conviction relief also increases. Under the Illinois Post-Conviction Hearing Act, this access is restricted to petitioners who are currently imprisoned or otherwise facing a restraint on their liberty. Persons convicted of a crime who have completed their sentence are barred from pursuing post-conviction relief under the Act, regardless of the existence of exculpatory evidence that supports their innocence. Removing this procedural roadblock and interpreting the Act broadly to allow any person convicted of a crime to raise a claim of actual …

Against The Peace And Dignity Of The State: Spousal Violence And Spousal Privilege, Malinda L. Seymore

Malinda L. Seymore

Every indictment in Texas ends with the phrase, "[a]gainst the peace and dignity of the State." This phrase is in recognition of the fact that crimes are not purely personal matters between a defendant and a victim, but are offenses against society as a whole. By enacting changes to its spousal privilege statute, Texas has an opportunity to demonstrate that domestic violence offends the peace and dignity of the state.

42. Repeated Self And Peer-Review Leads To Continuous Improvement In Child Interviewing, Stacia N. Stolzenberg, Thomas D. Lyon

Thomas D. Lyon

A Tale Of Two (And Possibly Three) Atkins: Intellectual Disability And Capital Punishment Twelve Years After The Supreme Court’S Creation Of A Categorical Bar, John H. Blume, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Paul Marcus, Emily Paavola

Sheri Lynn Johnson

No abstract provided.

"Speaking Rights": Evaluating Juror Discussions During Civil Trials, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, G. Thomas Munsterman

Valerie P. Hans

Permitting jurors to discuss evidence during civil trials may facilitate understanding and provide an outlet for their thoughts and questions, and does not appear to lead to prejudgment or prejudice.

Jurors' Evaluations Of Expert Testimony: Judging The Messenger And The Message, Sanja Kutnjak Ivkovic, Valerie P. Hans

Valerie P. Hans

Jurors are laypersons with no specific expert knowledge, yet they are routinely placed in situations in which they need to critically evaluate complex expert testimony. This paper examines jurors' reactions to experts who testify in civil trials and the factors jurors identify as important to expert credibility. Based on in-depth qualitative analysis of interviews with 55 jurors in 7 civil trials, we develop a comprehensive model of the key factors jurors incorporate into the process of evaluating expert witnesses and their testimony. Contrary to the frequent criticism that jurors primarily evaluate expert evidence in terms of its subjective characteristics, the …

Section 12 Of The Canada Evidence Act And The Deliberations Of Simulated Juries, Valerie P. Hans, Anthony N. Doob

Valerie P. Hans

In the past, there have been three major approaches to the experimental investigation of the jury. First, juror selection research involves the study of the relation between verdicts or leniency toward certain classes of defendants and the characteristics of potential jurors. The second class of research is group study, in which the amount and style of individual participation is observed within the context of simulated jury deliberations (e.g., Strodtbeck, James and Hawkins, 1957). Finally, experimental psychology has made another contribution to the study of the jury; numerous researchers have conducted experimental studies employing legal stimulus materials. Typically, in such a …

Science On Trial, Valerie P. Hans

Valerie P. Hans

The increasing complexity of both criminal and civil jury trials raises a host of issues for lawyers and judges. For the litigator, the first question is whether a jury can be trusted with a case that turns on highly technical evidence. For the trial judge, there are decisions about the admissibility of expert testimony, whether it is based on sound science, and whether a jury is likely to be misled by scientific claims. Should the judge permit jury innovations such as note taking, question asking, and juror discussions of evidence during the trial, hoping to increase jury comprehension of the …

Can Jury Trial Innovations Improve Juror Understanding Of Dna Evidence?, B. Michael Dann, Valerie P. Hans, David H. Kaye

Valerie P. Hans

A single spot of blood on a pink windowsill will tell investigators who broke a windowpane, turned a lock, and kidnapped 2-year-old Molly Evans from her bedroom in the middle of the night. An expert witness will testify that the DNA profile of the blood evidence recovered from the windowsill was entered into CODIS, an electronic database of DNA profiles. That process yielded a “hit,” identifying the defendant as the most likely source of the blood inside Molly’s room. But will jurors be able to understand the expert’s intricate analysis and use it to reach a verdict? And what—if any—steps …

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 …

Testing Jury Reforms, Valerie P. Hans, B. Michael Dann, David H. Kaye, Erin J. Farley, Stephanie Albertson

Valerie P. Hans

DNA evidence has become a key law enforcement tool and is increasingly presented in criminal trials in Delaware and elsewhere. The integrity of the criminal trial process turns upon the jury's ability to understand DNA evidence and to evaluate properly the testimony of experts. How well do they do? Can we assist them in the process?

How Much Justice Hangs In The Balance? A New Look At Hung Jury Rates, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, G. Thomas Munsterman

Valerie P. Hans

Reports of apparent increases in the number of hung juries in some jurisdictions have caused concern among policy makers. A 1995 report by the California District Attorneys Association cited hung jury rates in 1994 that exceeded 15 percent in some jurisdictions (the rates varied from 3 to 23 percent across the nine counties for which data were available). In 1996, the District of Columbia Superior Court reported a higher-than-expected hung jury rate of 11 percent. Why juries hang at these rates isn't clear, but some commentators have claimed that hung juries are the product of eccentric or nullifying holdout jurors …

The Timing Of Opinion Formation By Jurors In Civil Cases: An Empirical Examination, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Valerie P. Hans, Nicole L. Mott, G. Thomas Munsterman

Valerie P. Hans

The question of when and how jurors form opinions about evidence presented at trial has been the focus of seemingly endless speculation. For lawyers, the question is how to capture the attention and approval of the jury at the earliest possible point in the trial. Their goal is to maximize the persuasiveness of their arguments--or at least to minimize the persuasiveness of those of the opposing side. Judges, in contrast, are more concerned about prejudgment. They regularly admonish jurors to suspend judgment until after all the evidence has been presented and after the jurors have been instructed on the law. …