Criminal Psychology Chapter 12 Trial Consultation Talbot Kellogg Community College

Trial Consultation Assists attorneys in preparing for the trial, evaluating the effectiveness of the presentation, and formulating procedures for the selection of the jury. Assists attorneys in preparing for the trial, evaluating the effectiveness of the presentation, and formulating procedures for the selection of the jury. Forensic Psychologists? Forensic Psychologists? American Society of Trial Consultants (ASTC) American Society of Trial Consultants (ASTC) No certification or licensure requirement No certification or licensure requirement Backgrounds such as psychology, communications, sociology, and political science. Backgrounds such as psychology, communications, sociology, and political science. Criminal v. Civil cases? Criminal v. Civil cases? Ethical Issues. Ethical Issues.

Pretrial Activities Focus Groups – Group studies of the general population or specific groups of interest in order to determine any beliefs, feelings or biases held by that group. Witness preparation. Testimony Inconsistencies Role Plays Powerless Speech Ethical issues? Jury Composition issues. Peremptory Challenges Pretrial Publicity issues Change of Venue – i.e. Rodney King Sequestered Voir Dire

Presenting the Case Developing the “story of the case” - narrative Narrative coherence – Is it consistent? Does it have internal logic? Narrative fidelity – “the logic of good reasons”. Are these facts or values? Timing of the Defense opening statement. 2 options – now or later? Making concessions Sponsorship Theory – Make them say it. Inoculation Theory – Stealing Thunder

Evidence Presentation Serial Position Effect Serial Position Effect Recency Effect Recency Effect Primacy Effect Primacy Effect

Closing Arguments First or Last? First or Last? Expository Approach – Why is our evidence better than your evidence? Expository Approach – Why is our evidence better than your evidence?

Jury Selection Systematic Jury Selection v. Seat of the pants. Systematic Jury Selection v. Seat of the pants. Kernel-of-truth hypothesis Kernel-of-truth hypothesis Two primary approaches. Two primary approaches. 1. Broad Attitudes and Traits 1. Juror biases 1. Pro-plaintiff v. Pro-defendant (or at least anti-plaintiff) 2. Litigation Explosion, Deep pockets syndrome 2. Case-Specific Approaches 1. O.J. Simpson Juror questionnaire. P.302

Other Juror Biases The defendant’s characteristics Physical attractiveness – beautiful people are given the benefit of the doubt. Similarity to the jurors – people more similar to us are often given the benefit of the doubt. The judge’s instructions Disregard the last comment… often results in people paying closer attention to it. Beyond reasonable doubt. Is often misunderstood as meaning beyond all doubt. It instead means beyond the doubt of a reasonable person.