Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=11411
 
 

Citations



 


 



The Jury as Critic: An Empirical Look at How Capital Juries Perceive Expert and Lay Testimony


Scott E. Sundby


University of Miami School of Law


Virginia Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 6, 1997

Abstract:     
Drawing upon interviews with over 150 jurors who served on 36 capital cases (approximately half of the jurors served on cases where a death sentence was imposed and the other half on cases which resulted in a life sentence), this Article examines jurors' reactions to different types of witnesses: professional experts, lay experts and family members. The Article explores the reasons why jurors generally are highly skeptical of professional experts, especially defense experts, as compared to lay witnesses. The Article also examines, however, how jury receptiveness to expert testimony can be enhanced through effective integration of the expert's testimony into the testimony of lay witnesses. The Article uses several case studies to illustrate its points and draws upon the storytelling model of jury deliberations to help explain its findings. The Article concludes by considering the implications of its findings for capital litigation and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

JEL Classification: K14, K49

Accepted Paper Series





Not Available For Download

Date posted: October 17, 1997  

Suggested Citation

Sundby, Scott E., The Jury as Critic: An Empirical Look at How Capital Juries Perceive Expert and Lay Testimony. Virginia Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 6, 1997. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=11411

Contact Information

Scott E. Sundby (Contact Author)
University of Miami School of Law ( email )
1311 Miller Dr.
Coral Gables, FL 33146
United States
305-284-5848 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 690

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.422 seconds