Jury Symposium 2010 <br />Themes & Outcomes<br /><ul><li>Normative question: what are juries for?
Public education about juries
Support for juries
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Jury Symposium Outcomes & Plans 2010

341

Published on

Bullet points from the group discussions at the end of the symposium

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
341
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Jury Symposium Outcomes & Plans 2010

  1. 1. Jury Symposium 2010 <br />Themes & Outcomes<br /><ul><li>Normative question: what are juries for?
  2. 2. Public education about juries
  3. 3. Support for juries
  4. 4. Need for recognition of jurisdictional differences
  5. 5. Value of methodological differences
  6. 6. Mock v real
  7. 7. Maximising effectiveness of each method
  8. 8. Ecological validity
  9. 9. Value of cross-disciplinary research
  10. 10. Measures of jury performance
  11. 11. Accepted legal practice/tradition should not constrain research questions/approaches</li></ul>Research for the future –<br />JURY RESEARCH NETWORK (JRN)<br /><ul><li>Network/Centre/Institution for:
  12. 12. Mailing list
  13. 13. Advertising related events
  14. 14. Finding expertise
  15. 15. Applying for funding
  16. 16. Inviting speakers
  17. 17. Interaction with practitioners/bench
  18. 18. Annual events
  19. 19. Examination of fundamental normative question: “What are juries for (now, here)?”
  20. 20. Comparative/cross-jurisdictional law
  21. 21. Scotland
  22. 22. England/Wales/NI
  23. 23. Ireland
  24. 24. Italy
  25. 25. South Africa
  26. 26. Japan
  27. 27. Australia/NZ
  28. 28. Methodological support
  29. 29. Legal Empirical Research Support Network
  30. 30. More research on Comprehension
  31. 31. Decision-making
  32. 32. Evaluation of evidence
  33. 33. Application of law
  34. 34. Deliberations
  35. 35. Accountability
  36. 36. Expert evidence

×