Abstract This paper explains that, before one piece of evidence is displayed and discussed, the jury, who must evaluate this evidence, are often flawed in their selection for only one reason---race. The author discuses two landmark cases, which ended up in the Supreme Court because of this racial imbalance that tainted the evidence presented: "Swain vs. Alabama" and "Batson vs. Kentucky". The paper relates that, on the other hand, in the OJ Simpson case, a jury with many blacks acquitted him after being urged in the closing arguments to nullify the jury ideal and to vote to acquit because the defendant is black and you, the jury, as blacks, have suffered at the hands of the police.
From the Paper "First, "Swain v. Alabama", which arose from the 1962 prosecution of a black man "convicted and sentenced to death by an all-white jury for raping a white woman in Talladega, Florida Although 26 percent of the people then eligible for jury service in the county were black, no African-American had sat ion a trial jury since at least 1950." When it came time to select the jury that would try the case, however, prosecuting attorneys and sometimes defense attorneys used peremptory challenges to eliminate all of the blacks who were potential jurors. It is interesting to note that sometimes black defendants will instruct their attorneys to exclude blacks, believing that they would want to "show" their white fellow jurors that they could be just as severe on blacks as they could."
Abstract Although American jurisprudence has held that a juror cannot be included or excluded on a jury on the basis of race, beginning in the mid-20th century, many observers suggest that the entire process today is riddled with loopholes that allow attorneys to "shop" for jurors who will support their position based solely on racial considerations. This paper provides a review and discussion of the relevant literature on racial discrimination in jury selection, followed by a summary of the research in the conclusion.
From the Paper "What is known is that the composition of a jury can make the difference between a guilty verdict and a defendant going free, with distinct differences being found between black and white juries. For example, a study conducted by psychologist Dennis Ugwuegbu determined that white jurors were more likely to find a defendant culpable of rape when he was black and the victim was white than in other racial combinations; on the other hand, blacks were more likely to find that a white defendant was culpable when the victim was black (Hans, 1986)."
Abstract The paper considers the jury selection of an African American man charged with armed robbery. During the selection process a prospective juror is stricken by the prosecution in order to have a racially representative jury. The paper contains two essays, each with a compelling argument for or against the challenge, and both based upon the Supreme Court ruling in 1986, Batson v. Kentucky.
From the Paper "In the case in question for this essay, the defendant is an African American male being tried for armed robbery. As the voir dire process is being undertaken, the prosecution exercised a preemptory challenge to strike the sixth prospective juror from consideration. The sixth juror was, like the defendant, an African American, as were three of the five jurors already selected. When asked to defend this motion and action, the prosecutor stated that the juror should not consist of a racial makeup that is disproportionate from that of the nation as a whole. In this case, the jury would be 80% African American which is far different from the racial makeup of the United States. As logical as this argument sounds, the judge need only look at the 1986 Supreme Court ruling, Batson v. Kentucky, to see that this is illegal and cannot be allowed during the voir dire process."
Abstract The paper explores the classic social psychology works of S. Milgram and J.M. Darley and C.D. Batson. The paper shows how these works, which target seemingly unrelated ideas of authority and a sense of alacrity, can be combined to examine their individual and collective effects on an individual's decision to help or refrain from helping another person in need. The paper utilizes these two independent variables of a sense of rapidity and a high/low authority condition in order to determine what role authority and speed plays in an individual's decision to act.
Outline:
Abstract
Introduction
Method
From the Paper "Authority figures command obedience through their perceived status in the society and position of influence over an individual. It is assumed that this status and position of influence is gained by adhering to socially-acceptable (even socially-exemplary) beliefs, norms, and ethics. One question studied for many years has been a discord between these socially-acceptable beliefs and beliefs enforced by a rogue authority figure. Milgram's 1968 study of obedience and disobedience to authority presents a disturbing picture, where an individual is willing to inflict harm on another merely at the insistence of a perceived authority figure (Milgram, 1968)."
