The term “mock jury” is a mighty tool enabling solicitors understand what decision will be carried out with reference to the case they are in charge of.
As a rule, a ‘mock trial’ represents a panel of 12 judges, whose duty is to listen to each of the sides – to the prosecution and to the defense and, subsequently, announce their verdict. As soon as the procedure is over, the playing parts assemble to discuss the mock trial in detains, contemplating the statements and the reaction to them. In most cases, the side which organized a certain mock jury, watches the judges discuss the case with the help of a special mirror, sometimes applying cameras to record the judges’ activity.Initially, using ‘mock jury’ would generally get us back to ‘focus groups’, whixh automatically revolves the discussion towards ‘group therapy’, i.e, something form the domain of psychology. The term “focus group” dates back to the post-war (WW2) decades, blazingly enjoying the limelight towards the end of the 20th century.
. The usage of the notion was so frequent that it turned usual to address it meaning the means of providing solicitors with loads of thought-provoking material.One of the first specialists with highly optimistic attitude towards ‘mock juries’ , trial lawyer Bill Sims (Vinson & Elkins, Dallas) once aptly remarked: “I have been a big believer in mock juries and focus groups for over 10 years. I like to use mock juries twice during a case—once early on to get a feel for people’s visceral reactions to the themes I anticipate each side stressing, and then again near trial when I can weave in the facts that have come to light during discovery.
”Attorneys with loads of executed trials behind their backs start feeling many helpful particularities about the trials, which serves them any time they are in the courtroom. However, many of them dream every night about a weapon which enabled prophesizing the potential behavior of the judges, witnesses and opponents. One of the things to magically lend you a help in hand is mock juries. Mock juries are used as a preparation tool to help select a jury to predict a verdict or the amount of a settlement, and to develop the most effective arguments and presentations. In the most complicated cases, which present Herculean difficulties to the acting attorneys, it is vital putting commonplace people (the ones actual jury tends to invite) into the jury’s chairs and play the trial action as though it were real, subsequently analyzing the reasoning of this ‘panel of judges’.Understanding of Actual Jury BehaviourA.
Mock Trials Guarantee Impartiality at Case AnalysisOne of the thoughts that lead to appearing such a profession as an attorney, was the defendant was too involved in the case ‘up to his neck’, that he could not evaluate his chances and elaborates his actions at trial in the proper way; thus, unprejudiced attorneys were invited, to independently look at the case from the side, coming out with the solution. However, even those, sometimes find themselves part of the process in such a way, that lack in logical approach. If mock trials consecutively result in the defense losing the case, it is an indicator that the arguments ought to be thoroughly re-assessed; on the other hand, stable success implies that the claims at trial should also get more insistent.B.
Mock Juries Help Attorneys Evaluate Whether Juries Understand Their Case Themes and Accept the Attorneys' ArgumentsIt is no big secret that establishing a clear case theme may be a vital part of the trial process. Mock trials are indispensable while choosing the case themes which help to the case to this party’s favor. In a 1997 bad faith case where mock trials were conducted, the plaintiff's attorney had to deal with the situation when his client’s rights were violated as the application form was represented in the wrong way. The attorney decided to stake upon the fact, that although the defendant was incorrect in certain aspects, the insurance company was to blame as it indulged in making a number of considerable blunders in the papers but never acknowledged any of them.No matter how staggering it appeared to be, most part of the jury concluded no reimbursement had to take place, even though the insurer’s mistakes were irrefutable.
The attorney pondered over the case theme and came out with the one completely placing the blame on the insurer stating that it was insurer’s misconduct that resulted in the paper’s being not in order. This time the mock jury acted in a more favorable way, so that the attorney made up his mind to choose the second variation of the case them for the trial. As a result, the case was decided in his favor and punitive damage was inflicted. As we come to understand, this was a case where mock trials helped out of the lurch, turning a lost case into a positive one.
In another case involving a brokerage house's liquidation of a customer's securities account, the plaintiff's attorney stated a point that the financial abuse his client had to suffer resembled a rape as the client was virtually powerless as the broker would not listen to any of his objections as regards the account abolition. To several mock jurors such a comparison seemed too rough for they regarded intolerable comparing fiancial and sexual abuses. As a result of such negative attitude to this statement, it was excluded from the argument list, to the favor of the plaintiff’s party. Thus, mock trials help a lot whenever it has to be determined which of the statements are to be paid particular attention to/excluded; moreover, they are helpful choosing a case theme.C.
Case and Witness EvaluationWhenever evaluating liability, damages, and juror impressions of witnesses, mock jury once again appears to be an important means of influencing the juror’s panel. If, for instance, three panels listen to identical facts, and meet a certain decision, the odds are that a fourth panel will reach the same conclusion. In spite of the fact that exception is prone to proving the rule, if an evidence appears to be baffling to several panels, it should be rearranged so as to make the point more precise.Once it was a trial concerning a perplexing contract, the attorney of the defendant tried his best to apply various case themes in order to sound convincing; however, none of them worked as each time his side was condemned. As a result, instead of wasting precious time and sources, the plaintiff and defendant reached an agreement at the range of possible jury’s decision.
In a product liability case when because of manufacturer’s blame a child of a plaintiff died, the manufacturer applied mock trial system in order to find out whether he could smoothen the indignation of the jury, provided the sympathy to the parents, which the case was most likely to arouse.. Astounding as it might seem, all of the jurors proclaimed an acquittal verdict for the defendant for their regarded the parents to be guilty in what has happened. The defendant was ready to suffer multimillion losses to make up for the tragedy, eventually, to his own disbelief, he was ready to defend himself as he knew the average jury would be on his side.D. Stereotypes in Actual Jury Behavior through Mock JuriesIn the 70s and 80s there have taken place series of experiments where mock trials played the biggest part, which intended to, in addition, show what stereotypes could do in the courtroom.
Stereotyping has been shown to influence the recall and interpretation of information.For instance, it was shown that the physical attractiveness of the victim could make the jury treat the defendant positively or else negatively. In the experiment, mock jurors were introduced to the case of a car being stolen; in the first case the perpetrator was a beautiful woman, in the second – the non-attractive one. The one who possessed more natural charm tended to gain more support from the jury, what is interesting – they did not seem to care much about whether she cared to undertake any precautionary measures (using a steering lock, for example).Not neglecting the fact that outer appearance can be a mighty stereotype, let us not forget about other noticeable factors which are able to influence the trial outcome.
Mock trial study has been of considerable help here as well. Mock trials helped to understand that if the issue had to do with telling lies or deceiving people, customers or clients, for example, defendants with childish expressions about their faces had better chances of being found innocent. People with mature faces were believed to have committed a crime deliberately, wishing to inflict as much damage as possible on the plaintiff.Racial bias as a stereotype was also determined with the help of mock trials.
In a mock trial experiment, it embarrassingly turned out that whenever white juorors decided upon the fate of a black defendant, the decision was more severe, and it got even more severe if the plaintiff was white.On the whole, the list of things mock trials help us understand, is hardly limited. In the hands of a skilful professional mock trials may help comprehend a lot of the previously unfathomable; sometimes making an attorney close to his everlasting wish of becoming an oracle.
