Maybe We Can Let R2D2 Be The Judge, Too
from the tipping-the-scales dept
With high profile trials, a huge part of the circus is the jury selection, where jury consultants conduct mock trials, focus groups, and extensive background checks, all with the idea to create a jury that is most favorable for each side. It's a very expensive process, one that is out of reach for most defendants. Well, suprisingly, automation has now hit the art of jury selection, with computer-aided jury picking, by JuryQuest. Using just seven attributes: age, sex, race, education, occupation, marital status, and prior jury service, the service guides trial lawyers towards selecting juries with the best chance of their victory. JuryQuest defendants are acquitted over 50% of the time, which is almost twice the average for defendants with retained lawyers (26%) and nearly three times higher than those with just public defenders (15%). It seems crazy that just seven attributes could have such an affect on the outcome of a trial, but the difference for publicly defended defendants is perhaps most shocking. If automated jury selection becomes more accessible for all defendants, will it be able to close the gap for the defendants that currently stand the most chance of being convicted?Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Intellectual Property trouble ahead?
If that is so, I wonder how that will affect a defendant's rights to a fair trial? Perhaps a trial lawyer that has chosen not to purchase and use JuryQuest will be locked out of the business, and, because of infringing IP issues, will be forced to use inferior jury sellection criteria or be forced to purchase a license to use the superior jury sellection criteria - even if they don't use the software?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Correlation does not mean Causation
And whether or not an attorney has the money to use the software for a trial is probably a very good indicator of how much money that attorney has to spend.
Sadly in the criminal justice system, the amount of money you have to spend matters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels it's bad that the focus is shifting away from "are they guilty?" to "how can I make it easier to get them off the hook." I know that jury selection is supposed to be designed to make sure the peers that are selected are non-biased (impossible, I'd say) and objective. I didn't know that our "justice" system allowed for the intentional selection of members that are more favorable. Funny, I guess it's my foolish naivety that makes that sound a little... oh, I don't know... opposite to what the system is supposed to do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: sickening
What makes me sick is that a technique like this can work, not that someone is doing it.
What this demonstrates is that arbitrary, random or irrelevant factors play an enormous role in the outcomes of trials.
The legal system resists outside scrutiny of the quality of its product but if this were any other consumer product it would have been put out of business long ago for the shoddy quality of its services.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Pledge - v2.0 - Late-Stage Capitalism Edition
one Nation under Capitalism,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for bourgeoisie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real problem
For example, if you look at the Scott Peterson case, the jurors were asked what evidence led them to believe he was guilty... most of them replied that they "didn't need evidence, he just *looked* guilty".
THAT makes me far more sick than some software that essentially says "Hey, these people would probably be more likely to give you more of a chance than these other people".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it safe to assume poorer defendants will use public defenders. And is it also safe to say, poorer people are more likely to commit crimes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Is it safe to assume poorer defendants will use public defenders. And is it also safe to say, poorer people are more likely to commit crimes?
It is safe to assume the former, not the latter. Stats show that poor people commit DIFFERENT crimes than well off - not necessarily more.
Statistics DO show that poor people are more likely to be suspected of a crime...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
50% gulity is a statistic, not a result
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 50% gulity is a statistic, not a result
The statistic says that defendants using this service are over 50% MORE LIKELY to be aquitted. Re-read please.
Unless you can show some evidence that these numbers are false or show numbers which suggest statistical manipulation by the JuryQuest study you're comment is pointless and has no real value except to flame.
...to advertise that a jury selected by those will acquit YOU is overstating the worth of the JuryQuest service.
Interesting. Nowhere in the article did I read that it WILL aquit anyone. Only that the study shows that people who used the service were MORE LIKELY to be aquitted (hmm...I seem to recall saying that earlier). I suggest you not only re-read the article but that you rethink you're logical thought process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Violation of due process
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Violation of due process
Your opinion seems to be based on invalid or incomplete data. As is usually the case, the resulting conclusion is in error.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Violation of due process
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JuryQuest
[ link to this | view in chronology ]