Case Brief

Case Brief
I: Elements of the crime
Mr. Jeffrey Skilling was one of three executives at Enron Corporation that were indicted for
manipulating financials to show the public inflated numbers about Enron's profitability. By showing
these numbers to the public they were trying to mislead the public into thinking the company was
more profitable than it really was. Mr. Jeffrey Skilling was convicted by a Texas federal district
court of conspiracy, securities fraud, making false representations to auditors, and insider trading.
Mr. Skilling had been the C.E.O. of Enron Corp. Mr. Skilling appealed, he argued he was prosecuted
by the government under an invalid legal theory and that the jury he had was biased.
II. Defenses claimed by the defense
Criminal ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mr. Skilling had been the C.E.O. of Enron Corp. Mr. Skilling appealed, he argued he was prosecuted
by the government under an invalid legal theory and that the jury he had was biased.
III. Issues
Mr. Skilling argued that voir dire lasted only five hours and did not sufficiently question jurors. This
argument from Mr. Skilling failed because the record from the court showed that voir dire was
completed properly. Mr. Skilling also argued that the court should have never tried him in Houston.
Mr. Skilling pointed out prior cases where the Court decided that due to extreme media coverage
there was a possibility of juror prejudice that required the courts to change the venue. However, I
believe that Mr. Skilling's case differs from these prior cases which were all in small communities,
had media coverage that showed the defendant confessions, and trials that occurred right after the
crime and media coverage.
I also believe that Skilling's jury acquitted him of several charges, due to this face I believe that it is
very unlikely that there was any juror prejudice. Even though the media coverage of Skilling seems
to all be positive, I do not believe that it was not to the necessary level to show that there would be
juror prejudice. Due to all of these reasons, I do not believe that the district court made any errors by
denying Skilling's request for a venue change.
IV. Holding (the final decision)
Mr. Skilling moved to have his trial transferred
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Why Is Vivir Dire Important To The Future Of Juror?
Voir dire is French for "speak the truth" [thefreedictionary.com] [1]." It is the preliminary
examination of perspective jurors to determine their qualifications and suitability to serve on a jury,
in order to ensure the selection of fair and impartial jury [thefreedictionary.com] [1]. This process is
the verbal questioning of a juror by the judge, the parties, and their representative. Prior to verbal
questioning, the potential juror must submit a written questionnaire to determine if jurors are biased,
and/or should be excluded for a number of reasons. This tool is used to use to protect an individual's
constitutional right for an impartial jury [1].
Voir dire is not designed to educate jurors, but to enable parties to select an impartial panel.
Questions should only test the jurors capacity and competency; without instilling prejudicial issues
into their minds. Trial judges set questioning limitations and standards. The voir dire process is
important because any case in which a juror is biased can cause the case to be dismissed. Another
option available is to replace the affected juror [1]. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It can be a lengthy process because the attorneys are allowed to investigate the background of the
jurors, interview acquaintances, or hire social scientists to predict the jurors' verdict. The first step of
the voir dire process is the questioning of the potential juror by the judge. These questions test the
jurors' knowledge of the case, attitude toward the people involved in the case, and etc. The Supreme
Court acknowledged this type of questioning, because judges need to be concerned of the jurors'
prior knowledge and opinions formed about the case

Race And Jury : The Decision Making Of Juries And Race
Race and Jury: The Decision–Making of Juries and Race
When thinking of a jury, there is a belief that everyone is fair when it comes to making the decision
of whether the person being accused of the crime is guilty or not guilty because of the person's race.
What if this belief is not necessarily correct? There have been many instances in whether race has
been a factor when the jury makes a decision. According to Baskin, Goldstein, and Sommers (2014),
there has been enough evidence to show that racial biases influences the decisions of a jury. In this
paper, the articles will show how jury decision–making is influenced by the offender's race.
Questioning Assumptions about Race, Social Class and Crime Portrayal: An Analysis of Ten Years
of Law and Order Pop culture media, like Law and Order, has a way of showing people how crime
is portrayed. Case (2013), mentions that past studies about the representation of crime in the media
has increasingly shown fear to the public and portraying unrealistic standards of how crime is in the
real world. Media likes to exaggerate how things truly are in the real world, which is why people
believe what the media portrays. People will believe that everything they see in a television show
can truly happen in the real world, which certain things can happen but not everything. If people end
up believing in how the media portrays crime then people will be living in fear of their society being
more violent than it actually is (Case, 2013). In

Felony Voir Dire Case
Felony Voir Dire
Johnson and Haney describe a study related to the voir dire process.
The sixth amendment to the U.S constitution guarantees a defendant in a criminal prosecution the
right to a speedy, public, and impartial trial by jury. Once it has determined that the trail will be by
jury, the next step in the criminal proceeding is the selection of the jurors. During this process
possible jurors receive a summons in the mall ordering them to appear in court at a specified time
and date the people who are summoned comprise the venire (the prospective jurors for cases). Voir
dire Latin term meaning to speak the truth, this is an examination conducted by the courts or by the
attorneys of a potential juror or witness to determine if they would be proficient or qualified for
services. Jurors' questionnaires reveals information disqualifying them from jury service is only the
first step in the jury selection process. Typical questions relate to whether prospective jurors know
the defendant, the attorneys, or any of the witnesses, whether they have read or heard about the case
in the media, and whether they have racial, nationality, or gender biases. Effective voir dire is
getting the prospective jurors to tell the court or attorneys what they need to know.
During the voir dire process, the way jurors are removed is part logic and part legal strategy. The
judge determines that a potential juror is not likely to be fair to both sides in the case, than the juror
will be

Functional Group Decision Making
Functional Group Decision Making(FDM)
Definition
FDM answers the basic question asked by the developers of this theory. Their question is as follows.
"'Why do some groups make good decisions while others make bad ones?' Their model argues that
the answer to this question has to do with whether the group has successfully accomplished four
functions, which they call requisite functions" (pg.141). The four functions of this theory are
problem analysis, goal setting, identify alternatives, and evaluate and select. Problem analysis is
when the group focuses on the nature, extent and likely causes of the problem. This requires the
group to be careful when differentiating between problems and the symptoms of the problems. Goal
setting is when the group identifies what an ideal solution would look like. The group decides what
elements are necessary and what elements are ideal but not necessary. Identifying alternatives is
when the group generates a large number of possible solutions. This is when the group wants to
brainstorm as many possible solutions, no matter what the quality of the solution is. Finally, evaluate
and select is when the group evaluate each alternative using the established goals.
Examples From The Film
Goal setting is the first example that I found in the film. I saw this when the foreman says what the
goal of the jury is and what is needed for the guilty or not guilty verdict. I saw that one of the jurors
used problem analysis. This was when the juror started

Jurors Influence On 12 Angry Men
When watching the move 12 Angry Men, we see different views from the jurors such as social
influence, majority influence, specific motivation and egoism. This shows different attitudes and
opinions the jurors have. One man out of twelve jurors decides to take on a room of eleven stubborn
jurors as given the verdict of not guilty. The eleven jurors elected for the kid to be guilty and refused
to think otherwise until the one non guilty juror decided to step up and discuss the situation. The
majority of the jurors seem very impatient and anxious to get out of the courtroom. They believe the
one juror who is patient and wanting to discuss the situation is just wasting their time. The jurors
shows many characteristics throughout the movie ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Just when you think everyone is going to agree unanimously there will always be a Juror number 8
who has a different aspect on the topic at hand. Juror number eight played a huge role in this film,
without his strong judgement and logical answers there would have never been a discussion and
might have executed an innocent kid. This film shows the importance of innocent until proven
guilty. This films shows how one person can make a difference. This also shows how people can
rely on eye witness testimonies and tend to speak aloud before they thought process the situation in
front of them. Throughout the movie there were many psychological phenomenon's that I could
relate to but the few that I have discussed were thought of as most

The Fifth Amendment For Theu.s. Constitution Essay
The sixth amendment to the U.S constitution guarantees a defendant in a criminal prosecution the
right to a speedy, public, and impartial trial by jury. Once it has determined that the trial will be by
jury, the next step in the criminal proceeding is the selection of the jurors. During this process
possible jurors receive a summons in the mall ordering them to appear in court at a specified time
and date the people who are summoned comprise the venire (the prospective jurors for cases). Voir
dire Latin term meaning to speak the truth, this is an examination conducted by the courts or by the
attorneys of a potential juror or witness to determine if they would be proficient or qualified for
services. Jurors' questionnaires reveals information disqualifying them from jury service is only the
first step in the jury selection process. Typical questions relate to whether prospective jurors know
the defendant, the attorneys, or any of the witnesses, whether they have read or heard about the case
in the media, and whether they have racial, nationality, or gender biases. Effective voir dire is
getting the prospective jurors to tell the court or attorneys what they need to know( Ferdico, J 2005).
During the voir dire process, the way jurors are removed is part logic and part legal strategy. The
judge determines that a potential juror is not likely to be fair to both sides in the case, than the juror
will be excused for cause. There are two possible ways prospective jurors may be

Analysis Of The Movie ' 12 Angry Men '
The Decision Analysis Assignment
Frank Luu
The story of 12 Angry Men begins in a New York City courthouse at the conclusion of a murder
trial. The judge order the 12 men of the jury to recess and decide on a guilty or not guilty verdict for
a 18 year old boy charged with murdering his father. The judge informs them that a guilty decision
by the jury will result in a death sentence for the boy as the judge will not show any leniency. The
12 men are lead to the jury room where they will stay locked up until a decision is made. They
quickly go to a vote without much discussion and find out that 11 of the 12 men are ready to pass a
guilty verdict but 1 man decides to vote not guilty so that they can at least discuss the case. This
quickly draws the ire of the other jurors who have all made up their minds already and just want to
leave. This sets the stage for the movie as now they other 11 men try to persuade juror #8 into a
guilty vote, or perhaps the other way around.
Throughout the process there were several times information was presented and recounted and
discussed for further evaluation to prove a point. There were several instances of information being
presented for analysis and often times it was used to change a juror's vote (and sometimes back
again). One of the first instances is when Juror #8 brings up the point that one of the witnesses that
heard the defendant scream "I 'm going to kill you," could not have heard anything because of a
train that was passing by.

A Short Story : A Story?
All of James' life he thought that he was just a simple man and that he would die, perfectly ordinary,
in his small village. For 18 years he had lived life as it came to him, growing up in Thornwood. His
life was peaceful and dull. Every day since he was young he gathered edibles and alchemy
ingredients from the forest, to be sold at a small price. It was an easy job that he was good enough
at, but for a long time, he had held a secret dream, to leave this place. If only he had more money,
more power, he could do whatever he wanted. Then one day everything changed. James didn't know
it, but he had eaten a heralding fruit that he mistook for an ordinary berry. These mystical fruits
brought out latent magical powers in living creatures, turning men into mages and animals into
legendary beasts. For months he had been carrying around a powerful magic ability without the
slightest notice of it. James left his wooden house that morning well rested and ready for a long day
of gathering. His worn linen tunic was warm in the morning sunshine. He made sure to say hello to
his neighbor, Cassandra, before he left. She always took the time to water her garden in the morning.
Cassandra's long blonde hair flowed beautifully in the morning breeze. She looked up from her
watering and her baby blue eyes met his. "Good morning Cassandra," He said waving to her. She
smiled back to him, "Oh, good morning James!" Her smile made his face grow a small shade red.
"How is your

Fallacious Argument About Juror 12
Name: Dharmendra Kumar
Roll No.–13110033
Words– 1014 FALLACIOUS ARGUMENT OF 12 ANGRY MEN
The arguments without logical reasoning or invalid reasoning are called fallacious argument. In this
movie there are many situations where people have used fallacious argument, which is listed below.
#Juror 8.He is nineteen years old.
Initially EIGHT argue that kid is only 19 years old, how could he kill his father. But this age is
enough for thinking what to do or not. We have not any reasonable logic behind that kid can't
murder.
#Juror 8.There were eleven votes for guilty.
If most of the people are supporting one thing then oppose them and telling that since most of the
guy is supporting so i have opposed. This is poor reasoning. Initially ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
May be he has not critically analyzed this case or not get information of all evidence.
#Juror 7.The boy looks not guilty.
This is situation when after a long discussion people do not get clear result. SEVEN wants to go his
home and without having a valid reason decide that boy is not guilty. Here is the issue of a life.
Concluding for personal work is very shameful.
#Juror 8.You do not believe the boy's story, how can you believe the woman's.
I think it is not necessary that if one story seems wrong then another will also be. If someone don't
believe on one story then it is not necessary for them to not believe on another. We can't force
another to view everything in similar way.
#Juror 3.Nobody proved otherwise
If someone blame on me that i have killed someone and i have no evidence, it means not i really
killed someone. During initial inspection of the case there was no evidence in favor of kid. Due to
that we should not assume that kid had killed his father. There may be also possibility that all the
evidences are false.
Conclusion of this dramatic

12 Angry Men Film Analysis
12 Angry Men
For many books, details are missed or changed when a movie is made. Though most of the time this
can lead to problems, this is not the case with 12 Angry Men. 12 Angry Men is about 12 Jurors
trying to decide whether a boy is guilty or innocent. Following the closing arguments in a murder
trial, the boy seems undeniably guilty, and likewise, 11 of the jurors start with a vote of guilty. The
only juror standing up for him is juror number 8, Henry Fonda, and the rest of the story follows how
he uses his arguments and convinces the rest of the jurors to vote acquittal. Unlike many other book
– movie duos, in this case the director is able to not only retain all important details, he is able to
improve on the book by removing unnecessary details, convey emotion realistically, and background
noise. Firstly, the removal of unnecessary details helps improve the movie when the dialogue is
removed during Juror #10's rant, and when Juror #7's anti–immigrant personality is omitted from the
movie. When Juror #10 starts talking about "that type" of people and how "life don't mean as much
to them," (Rose 64) in the book the other jurors try to tell him to stop, which conveys the wrong
feeling because it shows they are listening to him. On the other hand, in the movie, they simply walk
to a corner of the room and ignore him, which shows that they don't want to listen and will continue
to ignore him, which actually showed how they felt better than when they tried to talk.

Pros And Cons Of Wolves In The Wild
Wolves are a marvelous creature, but should the be protected by the government? The answer is
yess. Wolves need to be protected by the government. As a population they have finally come back.
Having wolves in the wild benefits the people and the ecosystem. In 2010 they cost farmers over
$3.5 million in lost cattle to wolves but so much more to other creatures.
Wolves have successfully re–established a population in the rocky mountains. According to source
#6 the wolf population in the northern rocky mountains has gone from only 100 in 1995 to 1,700 in
2010. This shows that after being reintroduced to yellowstone the population is 17 times larger than
what it was when it was re–introduced. This has all happened since wolves stopped being federally
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
So as you can see the best solution for tourists, farmers, the ecosystem, and the wolves is to let us
keep the wolves in the wild where they belong and not in some sanctioned area where no
unauthorized people are allowed to even gaze upon these marvelous

Jury Duty And Court Cases
Jury Duty and Court Cases Based on the United States Constitution, all citizens have the right to a
"Trial by Jury," which is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision in order to direct the
actions of a judge. A jury pool is randomly selected first, and then the potential jurors are notified.
After, "Voir Dire," or jury selection, occurs where twelve people are chosen for jury duty. The
opinions of citizens differ greatly based on whether or not they believe that serving jury duty is a
privilege, responsibility, burden, or even unnecessary. According to Kris, a neighbor of mine, the
process of being selected as a juror is tedious, but she enjoys being a juror. She has only served in
one case, but feels that as citizens it is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Sean Lowe and the People of New York v. Keesshawn Nesbitt. In People v. Lowe, the court decided
on January 13, 2015, that Lowe was guilty of endangering the welfare of a child under Penal Law §
260.10(1). On June 28, 2014, after a firefighter could not immediately revive the defendant on a
public street while his two children in his care, one of the children being supervised by a stranger on
the street and the other "missing" according to the defendant himself, it was finally established from
an EMT technician called to the scene that Lowe was highly intoxicated under the influence of a
controlled substance. Both the EMT technician and firefighter smelled a strong odor of an alcoholic
beverage emanating from the defendant; however, when they reported it the firefighter only
mentioned that the defendant seemed under the influence of a controlled substance. For this reason,
Lowe tried to fight the case by using that as a Misdemeanor Complaint but it failed to be converted
into one, because the information of the eyewitnesses, using either terminology, was facially
sufficient. Next in order, in People v. Nesbitt, the court decided on September 17, 2015, that the
defendant was guilty after a deponent witnessed him enter an informants car without permission
while carrying a backpack with an unlicensed imitation firearm/air pistol, pellets for an air pistol,
and a bullet proof vest inside. The air pistol apparently looked, felt, and weighed the same as a real
pistol with a propelling force of air and not orange rubber stop on the tip. The court decided that
under Penal Law § 165.05 Nesbitt is criminalized due to unauthorized vehicle usage despite whether
or not he did or intended to operate the vehicle, along with the Administrative Code of the City of
New York § 10–131 (g) (1) that prohibits the possession of imitation firearms and the unlicensed
possession of air pistols. I agree with the court's

Mr Davis 12 Angry Men
Looking at the Bigger Picture
"What you can achieve in life has a lot to do with your self–image" (Roth 191). Mr. Davis from 12
Angry Men showed just how much he could achieve during the jury discussion with his own self–
image. He had the courage to stand up for his beliefs and continuously focused on persuading the
other jurors to see between the lines and take a look at the bigger picture. In the 1957 MGM film
entitled 12Angry Men Mr. Davis was patient, polite, and persistent to put in the effort to find out the
facts and truths within the case.
Patience is not the ability to wait, but the ability to keep a good attitude while waiting. During the
discussion between the jurors, Mr. Davis stayed calm rather than yell or argue to make his point.
"Belonging to groups gives us an important way to express our humanity" (Roth 149). Mr. Davis
expressed his humanity by listening to what the others had to say and even engaged in conversation
with them showing his interest in what they said. He did not interrupt anyone nor did he try to put
anyone down for what they would say. Mr. Davis stated "I just want to talk", meaning he wanted to
take the time to analyze all the facts and details about the case; keeping in mind the possibility of the
defendant being innocent. He wanted to help the others see things from a different point of view and
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mr. Davis shown some light on the prejudices of the jury, but did so in a polite manner. "... prejudice
always obscures the truth" (12 Angry Men). The prejudice of some of the jurors consumed them and
kept them from analyzing all of the facts of the case. Mr. Davis did his best to show his politeness of
the other jurors as well as the defendant. His self–confidence motivated the others to analyze the
facts. He also believed that no man was better than the other. All throughout the discussion, he
proved how polite he was just by his communication skills

12 Angry Men Case Study
One of the greatest quantities of substantiation against the young fellow on trial is the one of a kind
switchblade that was utilized to murder his dad. The store owner described selling this same sort of
blade to the young fellow the night his father was murdered. Be that as it may, Juror No. 8
demonstrated that the blade isn't exclusive at all when he shows a precise imitation and hammers it
down into the jury table. Jury No. 8 got it down the road from the young fellow neighborhood for
six dollars the night prior to the hearing.
2. Additional, there was a concern with the old man testimony. Another issue was the declaration of
the old man. Jury No. 8 proceeds with his attack on the proof by demonstrating that it was difficult
for the old man to have been in the place he was the point at which he supposedly observed the
defendant escaping the murder scene. Juror No. 9 expressed the old man was limping and had a
stroke a year ago and Juror No. 9 expected the old man was unessential all his life. Through future
investigation the jurors decided it took the old man 45 seconds rather than 15 seconds to the
stairway.
3. The self–assured Juror No. 2 addresses the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The lady insisted she saw the murder through the window of the moving L Train. In any case, Juror
No. 9, understands that the lady who purportedly observed the murder had impressions on the sides
of her nose, demonstrating that she wore glasses, however she failed to wear them in court. A few
members of the jury affirm that they saw a similar thing. Also, Juror No. 8 who wear glasses also,
expressed she would not have been wearing her glasses while attempting to rest and brings up that
the assault happened so quickly that she wouldn't have time to put them on. She couldn't be certain
that she saw the young fellow confer the murder. Ultimately, past the extent of reasonable doubt, the
lady would have never been permitted to occur in a jury circumstance, and would in reality have
yielded a

Twelve Angry Men : The Character Analysis Of Twelve Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men is a play that has been written down and put into a book format, for the
enjoyment of a wider audience. The play involves a jury in which one juror doesn't agree with the
rest over the verdict of the case that they all witnessed take place in the court. After much argument,
hostility, and anger, all of the jurors change their vote from "guilty" to "not guilty." This all
happened through the strong efforts of juror #8 in which he got to the bottom of the logical facts of
the case, and through the prejudices of his other jurors. This would make the protagonist of the play
juror #8, since he was the only juror who was willing to give the young boy whose life was on the
line, a chance. Although most people may consider the antagonist of the play to be one of the more
hostile, prejudiced juror's, I disagree with this idea. In my opinion, it is the defensive attorney who is
the true antagonist of this play. As for the theme, it seems quite clear that the writer of the play is
trying to show us that one strong person can make others aware of their true prejudices and present
ideas in a new way.
Juror #8 was a very calm and collected man, who had a collection of traits unique from all of the
other juror's. It is because of this that he was able to look at the case through a different lens, in
which he didn't simply accept the facts of the case as facts. He looked beyond what was
Harutyunyan 2 being stated, and questioned the legitimacy of what was being said in its entirety.
There wasn't a single part of the trial that he didn't bring up to the other men, and you could tell that
he had thought deeply about every argument that he presented. He held no prejudice against the boy
or any of the witnesses that had stepped forth, which is ultimately what led him to instil a reasonable
doubt in the others. One great example of this is when he presented the ideas about the El train being
too loud for the boys shout to have been heard, or that the old man would've taken longer than he
said he did to get from one side of the room to the other. He made the other juror's consider his
arguments through his logical claims and persistence. Even though the other men didn't want to
listen to him at first, they

Sensationalizing Criminal Activity in the Media
The media constantly reports on criminal activity and crime as a whole within our community in
which it has every right to do. However, the media often sensationalises crime in order to create
'moral panic' within the community, using it as a way to control how the public perceives current
community issues. 'Some people may be led to a "blind" acceptance of the "reality" of such
presentations as constructed by the media' (Crime and Justice, 2012, Pg. 63)
Because a majority of the public have minimal experience with the judicial system, public
knowledge and views of law and the legal system are dependent on media representations (N.
Marder, 2001). General observation can quickly identify that the media almost always presents a
distorted view of the law. The relationship between law and media is very complex and constantly
evolving, however, it is clear that relatively few of us have experienced first–hand the effects of
serious criminal violence. (Crime and Justice, 2012)
Our understanding of crime is predominantly derived from media and not from objective data, such
as real time crime statistics or victimisation surveys. This is very problematic to members of a jury
as it can be assumed that the majority of a jury have a distorted view of reality as Jurors are drawn
from the community at large, so it is only to be expected that jurors will reflect the general social
outlook and values of their communities. (Jurors 24/7, 2014)
Greene (2014) wrote about how media

Observation Of Gfrann Zfran Zafar's Murder Trial
The Judge then asked if any panel members had trouble reading, writing, or speaking English. He
also asked if anyone was affected by or taking care of someone with a chronic health issue that
interfered with their ability to serve on a jury, and two members had family undergoing treatment
that they cared for. The doctor previously mentioned was scheduled to be in the Operating room
during the trial. After that, he continued to ask if anyone had nonrefundable travel plans, which
several people did, and after that he asked if anyone had childcare conflicts. There were three single
dads in the room unable to serve for that reason. Lastly, he asked if there was anything that impacted
someone's ability to be an impartial juror that had not been previously discussed. When no one ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I felt that this was an incredibly thorough and interesting observation of the jury selection process.
I observed Ghufran Zafar's murder trial on April 5th and 6th in the first criminal district court. He
was accused of murdering his wife in their Arlington home in April of 2016. When I arrived on
Wednesday, the prosecution had just called Sergeant Neil Landers to the stand. After he was sworn
in, the questions

Assignment Of Voir Dire Questions On The Law
Macey Pfeifer CRJ 101 Terrell Moore Jr 21 September 2017 Writing Assignment #2 Voir Dire
Questions: 1. Have any of you been educated on this case prior to being just read the statement of its
entity? 2. After being given the statement of the case, are there any issues with this case that may
cause you to think or act impartially considering the evidence according to the law? 3. *After
introductions* Do any of you know my staff members or me on any basis? (Social, professional,
etc....) 4. Are any of you familiar with the defendant's attorney or any employee they have on any
basis? 5. Do any of you know the defendant on any basis? 6. If you were my client, would you be
okay with having yourself as a juror on the case? 7. *After showing the witness tab* Do any of you
know of or think you might know any of the witnesses that are listed? 8. Has anyone you know or
you personally ever been the victims of criminal conduct? (If yes, they would need to give a brief
synopsis) 9. (If #7 was yes) Do you feel like this situation would cause you to act impartially
throughout this trial? 10. Has anyone you know or you personally ever witnessed an act of criminal
conduct? 11. (If #10 was yes) Do you feel that this would make you act unfairly or serve
impartially? 12. Do any of you, your friends, or your family members serve as any type of law
enforcement officer? 13. (If #9 was yes) Do you feel this relationship may prevent you from being
fair in this case? 14. Can you think of a

Business Law
Module 2 Journal Assignment
Consider issues raised by the article involving the complexity of litigation and the make–up of
juries. What is the nature of some of the complex lawsuits at issue today? Do you believe that our
current jury system is sufficient to handle emerging complex issues?
Traditionally, and even now, the intent of having a jury hear cases is to have a case be heard by a
collection of piers. This collection is carefully selected to be neutral and unbiased. The selection
should not take into consideration age, race, gender, or any other defining attribute. This means,
essentially, that there should be both older and younger people selected for any jury. In the case
regarding Apple vs. Samsung, "the jury was ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Jurors are well accustomed to entertaining commercials, Web sites and even newscasts. New
technologies utilizing visual strategy mimic these experiences.
Others issues may involve smartphones. I feel as though it would be imperative for an attorney to
use a smartphone in cases involving smartphones. Otherwise, difficulty could arise in trying to
describe the issue" (Sabulis).
With that being said, I feel that attorneys with technology based knowledge have the upper hand,
and in order to compete with the ever growing uses of technology, attorneys must adapt to any and
all means necessary in order to win over the jury and present their case in a way that is both
meaningful and easily understood.
"As jurors continue to evolve, and as Millennials occupy more and more seats in the jury box, the
influence of technology will only increase. It will change the way children grow up, students learn,
and lay citizens perceive litigation. Only those attorney's savvy enough to understand the jury's
changing dynamics will find themselves consistently successful in tomorrow's complex litigation"
(Wilhelm)
Works Cited
Mintz, Howard. Apple vs. Samsung: Jury foreman says verdict not meant to send big message. San
Jose Mercury News (California), 5 May, 2014. Web, 21 Jan 2016.
Sabulis, Tom. Pro and Con;

The Themes Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men
In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions interfere as an argumentation about the
guiltlessness of a young defendant is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that suspend
over the heads of the jurors are conception to lift as time advances and new facts are presented. 12
Angry Men had discussed one issue under a manner of prejudice and it was different for each juror.
One of the jurors is not happy about this stay of fulfilment and is holding fast his opinion of guilty.
Juror three, the leader of his business, rejects to change his vote or judgment in any way. Still
haunted by his own son, juror three orally violation the group with a powerful tone and a reticent
situation. One of twelve, Reginald Rose created them all from the same pen and ink, and they could
all be no more different.
Throughout the play the character of juror 3 had shown the audience many types of prejudice that he
represented it in different ways of actions that happened with him in his own life. Furthermore, juror
3 had played his role during the play as a guy who's rigid in his opinions and not used to having
people disagree with him. Even before the jury has started talking "Six days. [the judges] should
have finished it in two. [Slapping back of one hand into palm of the other.] Talk! Talk! Talk! [Gets
up and starts for water cooler.] Did [to the other jurors in the jury room] ever hear so much talk
about nothing?" additionally, in his mind, it's totally clear that the defendant

Reintroduction Of Wolves Essay
For thousands of years wolves have roamed the lands all around the world. From rich mythology
and forgotten lessons, scientists have found evidence of wolves in almost every culture. Driven and
hunted to near extinction conservation efforts have uncovered these long–forgotten teachings once
again. Researchers are reminded of important family dynamics and the many parallels found in
humans. Wolves were on the endangered list because they were hunted until almost extinction.
Settlers farming of the land and the value of furs drove the hunt to eradicate one of nature's top–
level predators. Over the last few centuries biologists, ecologists, and scientists have been studying
the effect this eradication has had on natures ecology. By observing the reintroduction of wolves
into Yellowstone National Park scientists are uncovering new information on the real impact of top
predators like the wolves. While the fight for survival of their species continues conservationists are
fighting to find common ground to live and coexist with these formidable predators. Despite the
legalization of massive slaughter of thousands of these majestic animals for sport, children of the
next generation are already educating themselves and advocating for conservation. The hope is that
these education and conservation efforts will allow humans and wolves to co–exist.
Scientists estimate the beginnings of the evolution of the wolf ancestors approximately seven to ten
million years ago. Although the wolf

Film Review : Film Analysis Of 12 Angry Men
Although 12 Angry Men was released over 60 years ago, the film has maintained universal acclaim
among movie critics. With a rare score of 100% on the movie review website RottenTomatoes.com,
it is worth investigating what makes this film so appealing. With a seemingly mundane plot, 12
Angry Men follows a jury that debates over the innocence or guilt of a young man who is accused of
murder. There are no bright explosions or grandiose imagery. Instead, 12 Angry Men manages to
capture audiences simply by offering an engaging story, outstanding acting, and creative production
techniques.
Although the film takes place in a single room, the story succeeds in gripping the audience simply
through the conversation of the jurors. The film begins with the impression that the defendant in the
trial is obviously guilty. But when the jurors take a preliminary vote, there is one man, Juror #8, who
votes "not guilty". All of the jurors are frustrated with Juror #8's decision, but they decide to talk it
out. This initial conflict sets the stage for a series of intricate exchanges which bring the audience
into the story. When the jurors begin to analyze the evidence from the trial, reenact the murder, and
question the validity of the witnesses' testimonies, more jurors decide to switch their vote to "not
guilty". This process of slowly revealing new information through the jury's commentary makes for
excellent storytelling and keeps viewers engaged with the film. In contrast to 12 Angry Men, one
recent film named Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen failed to appease movie critics due to a lack
of compelling storytelling. Throughout the Transformer film, storylines jump around inconsistently
before poorly converging towards the end. In a scathing review, Douglas Perry, a movie critic and
author for The Orgenion, references Transformers and other big budget films."'Revenge of the
Fallen' almost feels like it's signaling an end–game for blockbuster movies: all sensation, no content,
catastrophic expense." While 12 Angry Men lacks loud interstellar robots, massive explosions, and
even color picture, the film has an engaging story which successfully keeps viewers hooked to their
screen. Helping to progress the story, the actors

When I Start Playing Guitar Analysis
1. When and why did you start playing?
I started playing when I was 10, my older brother introduced me to heaps of different music
especially 80's & 90's punk and I loved it... I loved everything from punk to pop really, I'd lay in bed
at night listening to the radio trying to record my favorite songs on my walkman and wanted to play
it just seemed like a natural thing to want to do... I've never really thought why I began, I just loved
music !!
2. Which instruments do you play?
I play guitar and piano, I learnt guitar first when I was 10 and piano later when I started producing.
Electronic music and the process of writing is largely based around the use of some type of key–
board or sampler so I think that skill just comes about. I still write a lot of my music on guitar and
use [a] piano to recreate them ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Who was your first teacher? Other teachers?
For a month or two, I went to a family friend and he would show me songs to play and I had friends
who started playing around the time I did so we would learn new stuff and show each other... But
never actually had lessons for any instruments.
9. Describe your first instrument. Other instruments.
My first Guitar was a Fender Strat model but a fake one, we couldn't afford the real thing. I played
that for years and eventually got a Gibson Les Paul and these days play a Fender Telecaster (a real
one now) and have a Maton acoustic guitar! Piano wise, apart fro a few second–hand organs I sal–
vaged from junk piles... I have only ever owned midi keyboards...
10. What are your fondest musical memories? In your house? In your neighborhood or town?
Basically, every awesome memory I have involves music... But things like my first band (which was
called Two Odd Socks ha), we use to jam in my garage or my mates back room and those days were
unforgettable, and my younger days going to concerts with my older bro... there is nothing I would
trade for those memories.
11. Were you influenced by old records & tapes? Which

No Heroes, No Villains Essay
No heroes, no villains
Shelby DiRoma
Monroe Community College
No heroes, no villains
On June 28, 1972, James Richardson awaiting the subway train which would take him to work. He
was stopped and ordered to "put up your hands, and get against the wall". These directions were
given by an off duty Transit Authority patrolman named John Skagen. Skagen's actions seem
unprovoked and unnecessary. After a short tussle the two men exchanged shots and Richardson fled
the scene on foot. Two other officers that were on the main street above the subway station were
made aware of what was transpiring below and rushed to the scene. As they approached the entrance
of the station, Richardson who was fleeing the scene ran directly into one of the ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Richardson's trial was delayed for twenty seven months before finally beginning in Sept. 1974.
The trial was long and was delayed numerous times due to Kunstler's busy schedule with other
demanding trial cases. The delays were also part of Kunstler's defense strategy. There was an
abundance of evidence shown throughout the trial among which was the ballistics test. These test
showed that of the five shots that Skagen endured only two were from Richardson's gun. After a
yearlong trial the prosecutor and the defense gave their summations and the jury deliberated. The
deliberation took several days. In the end Richardson was convicted with three of the original seven
charges; manslaughter in the second degree, possessing a weapon as a felony, and criminal
possessing of stolen property in the third degree. The judge sentenced Richardson to a term no more
than ten years for the conviction of manslaughter in the second degree. No more than seven years
for the conviction of felony possession of a weapon. The criminal possession of stolen property was
unconditionally discharged and the sentences were to be served concurrently. Kunstler appealed this
sentenced and Richardson was allowed to stay out of jail on bail. On April 13, 1976 the Appellate
Division reversed the manslaughter conviction and the felony gun conviction. The case was sent
back to the original court and Richardson was resentenced to three years

The Factors Influencing the Way Each of the Members of the...
The Factors Influencing the Way Each of the Members of the Jury Perceived the Murder in Twelve
Angry Men
Each of the members of the jury perceived the murder according to their own beliefs, values and
social status. As the story unfolds, reveals the jurors' complex personalities, preconceptions,
backgrounds and interactions. The most important factors that influence perception is personality,
learning and motivation.
The juror that strongly believes that the defendant is guilty is a very rude man and biased. A factor
that affects his perceptual selections is that he sees the environment as hectic and unstable. On the
other hand, he is influenced by the estrangement from his own teenaged son that ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
I believe that Henry Fonda's decision to disagree with the original vote of «guilty» was not based on
his firm belief that the defendant was innocent. At first Fonda bases his vote for the sake of
discussion after all, the jurors must believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.
He supports the belief that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Also he takes into
consideration that the case is about a matter of a life or death of a young man and that must decide
wisely about the verting. Fonda is the voice of reason even as he realises that this may free a
murderer. His strength lies in finding the weak spots in arguments, which make it easy for the juries
to change their mind.
3)Why do you think Henry Fonda was so successful in changing the attitudes and perceptions of the
other members of the jury?
Fonda is the natural leadership of the juries. In addition, he takes advantage of the jurors' complex
personalities to convince the other jurors that a "not guilty" verdict might be appropriate. As a result
he persistently and persuasively, forces the other men to slowly reconsider and review their vote.
He supported his beliefs with strong evidence. One of them refers to the claim that the case of

No Heroes, No Villains By Steven Phillips
In the short book of "No Heroes, No Villains" by Steven Phillips On June 28, 1972, a Transit
Authority patrolman, John Skagen, was on his way home from testifying at court for an arrest he
made a couple of weeks prior. Skagen was taking the train home to the Bronx when he saw and
stopped James Richardson who was awaiting the subway train which would take him to work at
Lincoln Hospital. Skagen ordered him to "put up your hands, and get against the wall". Skagen's
actions seem unprovoked and unnecessary. After a short tussle the two men exchanged shots and
Richardson fled the scene on foot. Two other officers that were on the main street above the subway
station rushed to the scene. As they approached the entrance of the station, Richardson who was
fleeing the scene ran directly into one of the officers. One of the officer noticed Richardson was shot
and attempted to stop Richardson. The other officer continued down into the subway and witnesses
Skagen holding his gun and pointing it towards him, the officer emptied his gun into Skagen who
was able to let off one round prior to the officer shooting him. Richardson was later apprehended
and taken to the emergency room for his wounds. His gun was also retrieved. Skagen was rushed to
the same hospital emergency room where he was pronounced dead. Richardson confessed to
shooting Skagen and revealed that there were only four rounds exchanged between the two men.
Skagen's autopsy revealed that he had been shot five times and

The Decision Making Of Judges Essay
According to Professor J. Peltason, "The decision as to who makes the decision affects what
decisions will be made." Peltason's words refer to the inescapable human factor present in judicial
process, specifically in terms of the decision–making of judges. Fairness and impartiality are two of
the most important considerations and desires the legal system should aim to achieve. Unfortunately,
due to the human factor, impartiality and fairness are ideal goals that are difficult to realize in the
system. Specific procedures are in place and meant to be practiced in order to ensure justice in the
legal system, and the process varies depending on the type of case. The different types of cases have
differing standards of proof, extensions of due process, and proceedings. On the basis of these
important differences and of specified proceedings, the efforts toward fairness in the civil process
can be evaluated.
On Wednesday, October 26th, after meeting with Judge Norma Lindsey's judicial assistant, I waited
for further instruction from Bailiff Victor Ramon outside of courtroom 5–3 where a civil trial would
take place. He led me to my seat in the courtroom, and I patiently waited for the jury selection to
begin. The jurisdiction of the court was state trial court in the civil circuit division, and around 10:15
AM, the session began with Presiding Judge Norma Lindsey. I remained at the courthouse until the
session concluded at 5:15 PM that evening. The counsels included the

Twelve Angry Men Character Analysis
The way one person treats another is often a direct reflection of how they view themselves. People
with poor self–images are often quick to judge, demean, belittle, and rebuke others for their
mistakes, shortcomings and flaws, simply out of spite or to protect their own reputation. This is true
even in the 1957 MGM film Twelve Angry Men, where eleven of the twelve jurors attempt to
convict a young man not based off of sound evidence, but off of personal prejudice and self–
righteousness alone. It was the leadership of the eighth juror, however, that convinced the other
jurors to set aside their personal biases to acquit the young man accused of killing his father. In the
film, the eighth juror, Mr. Davis, analyzes the self–images of the other eleven jurors and displays the
core values of humility, patience and mercy in order to lead the group to the consensus that the
accused is not guilty.
The Merriam–Webster Dictionary defines humility as "the quality or state of being humble" and
"freedom from pride or arrogance". Humility, simply put, is the opposite of prejudice. In the film,
many of the jurors enter the room with preconceived notions, falsified beliefs and irrational ideas
about the accused. Others enter the room unsure of their vote and to protect their pride, immediately
side with the jurors who believe the young man is guilty. Examples of this include how several of
the jurors stereotype the accused on the basis of race and how the third juror in particular forms a
bias against the young man simply because of his
age and the fact that the young man reminds him of his son. Mr. Davis, however, takes another
stance. In the book The Achievement Habit: Stop Wishing, Start Doing and Take Command of Your
Life, Dr. Bernard Roth states that "true mindfulness is seeing without judging" (Roth 205). Mr.
Davis perfectly models this quote as he approaches the issue with sympathy towards the young man
in regard to his upbringing. On an analytical level, the screenplay convincingly moves the audience
to side with Mr. Davis through the use of honest dialogue that allows viewers to put their trust in
what Mr. Davis says. The validity of Mr. Davis' claims also stems from the profile of his character
crafted by the

Midterm Ritual Analysis By Emile Durkheim, Arnold Van...
Midterm Ritual Analysis In order to fulfill an individual's constitutional right to a trial overseen by a
jury of his or her peers, the process of juror selection is repeated every day in courtrooms around the
country. The process is not only vital to the American justice system as a whole; for the prospective
juror it is also a defining feature of their U.S. citizenship. Juror selection and the accompanying voir
dire, when examined for more than its procedural parts, reveals itself to be more complex than a set
of ordinary practices. The frameworks established by Emile Durkheim, Arnold Van Gennep, and
Victor Turner help to separate the ritual elements present in jury duty from aspects that are more
representative of "technological routine".
British structural functionalist Arnold Van Gennep was studying in circumstances very different
from the modern moment. Still, Van Gennep's analysis offers a useful framework for understanding
the stages of ritual. If one is willing to see jury duty as a rite of passage, a marker of adulthood
within American society, then one can begin to see preliminal, liminal, and postliminal rites that
make up its composition (Van Gennep 1960 p. 11). This division of rites can be seen in the treatment
of space within the courtroom. When a prospective juror begins jury service, they partake in the
"pivoting" that separates them from the profane world and temporarily places them in the realm of
the sacred (Van Gennep 1960 p. 12). They are identified

Essay about Twelve Angry Men Juror 3
12 Angry Men Essay Juror#3 In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions collide as
discussion about the innocence of a young boy is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds
that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are
presented. One juror is not happy about this stay of execution and is holding fast his opinion of
guilty. Juror three, the president of his business, refuses to alter his vote or opinion in any way. Still
haunted by his own son, juror three verbally assaults the group with a forceful tone and a taciturn
attitude. One of twelve, Reginald Rose created them all from the same pen and ink, and they could
all be no more different. Juror three is angry, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Seeing his chance, he is firmly set on this boys guilt, seeing his own son's guilt in the accused. But it
does not stop there. Throughout the play, juror three interrupts others in mid–sentence and attacks
their opinions hoping to quash them quickly before they pollute his own flawless opinion and doubt
has a chance to creep into the dark crevices of his mind. For instance, when juror eight surprises the
group with a second knife, juror three is already angry, too angry. His voice rises and shakes with an
animal–like ferocity. "You pulled a real bright trick here. Now supposing you tell us what you
proved here. Maybe there are ten knives like that one. So what?" Not thinking that this put a dent in
his case, juror eights brains have overcome the emotions of juror three. With a very short temper to
go along with his all–powerful attitude, juror three is not a nice person. Already he has threatened
death towards one of the other jurors and would have made good the threat had it not been for the
decisive actions of the other jurors who jumped up to hold him back.. An acrimonious and blind–
sighted executioner, juror #3 is one of many that an innocent victim would not want to decide their
fate. Unfortunately, democracy does not only apply to the fair and just, and undoubtedly innocent
men and women have fallen prey to the unwavering wrath of men

Jury Process
The Jury Selection Process
Taurean F Dawkins
Strayer University
Huntsville, AL
February 10, 2013
Abstract
"The Jury Selection Process" is a research paper that reviews the jury selection process in detail.
First we will review the stages of the criminal trail and go in depth with the jury selection process.
The paper will demonstrate why the jury selection process is necessary for the United States as well
as its patrons. The paper will also provide a break down of advantages and disadvantages on the jury
selection process. In addition to the information listed above, we will review some large profile
court cases and its jury selection process. This will determine just how detailed and challenging the
process can prove to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In order to serve on this jury each of the potential juror had to fill out a number of different items.
First, each potential juror had to complete 79–page questionnaires that contained 294 questions
(Ford & Newton 1994). This questionnaire had questions pertaining the prosecution and the
defense. In addition, each candidate had to complete a one–page "hardship" questionnaire (Ford
& Newton 1994). Due to this difficult process the jury selection took two months to finish. By
using this method it ensured that OJ Simpson received a fair trial and know one would be biased to
his situation. Another example that we could review with a rigorous jury selection process would be
the Michael Jackson case in 2011. The defendant in the case was Dr. Conrad Murray. Dr. Murray
was accused and convicted for manslaughter because he gave Michael Jackson a powerful
anesthetic and abandoned him. The pool of perspective jurors started with 145 people (Duke, 2011).
With the prosecution and defense using their peremptory challenges, they narrow the juror list down
to 84 potential jurors (Duke, 2011). In order to further investigate, each candidate had to fill out a
questionnaire that contained 113 different questions (Duke, 2011). The prosecution and defense had
a week in order to review the questions from each juror. Each side was allowed twenty minutes in
order to question each potential juror and determine if they would be a good fit for this problematic
case. By using this

Essay on The Gray Wolf
This report is all about the gray wolf. Its scientific name is Canis Lupis. Canis is the Latin word for
dog. The genus also includes jackals and coyotes. Lupis is the Latin word for wolf. Gray wolves
look similar to German shepherds, but the wolf has longer legs and bigger feet. The color of a gray
wolf can range from black to white, but shades of gray are the most common. A unique feature about
gray wolves is that the farther north you find them, the larger they are. Males can range from (nose–
to–tail) five to six and a half feet and females range from four and a half to six feet. The normal life
span of a wolf is about thirteen years, but most wolves don't live past ten years for numerous
reasons. Examples include disease, hunters, etc. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Here, she can keep the pups away from the rest of the pack. Unlike most mammals, the male wolf
helps raise the pups as well. After about one month, the pups are ready to go out of the den and
move from mother's milk to meat that is regurgitated by the parents. After one year, the pups have
grown into adults.
This a map of the world representing where the gray wolf can be found. They can be found in the
north half of North America, Western Europe, Russia, India, and parts of central Asia. Within
Washington State, wolves generally live in the Cascade and Olympic forest and mountain regions.
Wolves are natural born predators. They are considered secondary consumers. This means that they
eat animals that eat plants, primarily deer. The wolves in the pack that are capable oh hunting hide in
the brush still as statues. They scan a herd of deer for the weakest and oldest to catch as a meal.
When the time is right, they burst out of the brush and aim for their prey's hind legs, taking away its
ability to run. After that, they bite its neck, making it impossible to breathe. After a successful kill,
the wolves can do many things. They can eat their meal right there or they can "cache" the kill.
Caching a fallen deer means burying it underground for use in the cold winter when prey is scarce.
Wolves are important to society because of some of the animals they prey on. Wolves prey on a
small animal called a vole. Voles are

CSI Effect In Court Cases
The CSI Effect is the belief that television crime shows are effecting decisions made in the court
rooms from jurors. Prosecutors and Judges believe that these shows are causing jurors to be out of
touch with reality when it comes to making a decision about a case in the court room. The Jurors are
said to be out of touch with reality because they have a demand for conclusive scientific evidence.
People who experience the CSI Effect tend to think they are experts in the field. Many forensic
professionals have faced the occasional person at a crime scene telling them how to do their jobs the
way they saw it on CSI (The CSI Effect–Crime Museum, n.d.).
The CSI Effect was first described in the media as a phenomenon resulting from viewing forensic ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Unfortunately, life does not always imitate art. Evidence proved that in a number of Durnal studies,
that exposure to forensic science television drama series has altered the American legal system in
complex and far–reaching ways. Jurors think they have a thorough understanding of science they
have seen presented on television, when they do not. In a case cited by Durnal, jurors in a murder
trial brought to the judge's attention that a bloody coat introduced as evidence was not tested for
DNA. The defendant admitted being present at the murder scene, so the test would not have thrown
light on the identity of the true culprit. The judge stated that television is to thank for jurors knowing
what DNA tests could do, but not when it was appropriate to use them. Another study revealed 62%
of defense lawyers and 69% of judges agreed that jurors had unrealistic expectations of forensic
evidence. Approximately half of the respondents in each category felt that jury selection was taking
longer than it used to, because they had to be sure that prospective jurors were not judging scientific
evidence by television standards (The CSI Effect,

Essay about The Power of Leadership in 12 Angry Men
Once planted in the minds of individuals, ideas have a remarkable ability to grow with the strength
and speed of the most powerful pathogens – possessing equal communicability as they spread to
proximal centers of consciousness. How can this characteristic of ideas be utilized to benefit
society? In the film Twelve Angry Men, we see a situation where Juror Eight – equipped with all the
autonomy and wisdom of an ideal leader – appeals to logos in an attempt to promote the
consideration of an idea, which he has planted in the minds of an otherwise unanimous jury; this
idea being the mere possibility of innocence in the conviction of a boy charged with patricide.
Ideally, leaders will possess an ability to transcend the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After the twelve jurors had taken their initial vote, Juror Eight found himself to be a pariah among
his associates, for simply possessing an opinion contradictory to the other 11 men in the room;
breaking the pattern of unanimous voting, and declaring that he felt the accused might not be guilty.
After the other jurors took turns verbally expressing their dissatisfaction with his audacious
contradiction to the majority opinion, Juror Eight calmly responded: "It's not so easy for me to raise
my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first" (Fonda). Here lies the fundamental
characteristic that renders Juror Eight a leader among his peers: his desire to consider the situation at
hand to a deeper extent than what the other jurors felt was necessary. This inherent drive to face the
true perplexity of the situation and submerge his consciousness under the pressure that upheld a
human life ultimately led Juror Eight to shed light upon the holes in the evidence, and find an
opinion worthy of acting upon. By deeply evaluating the witness's' testimonies, and considering the
consequences of his decision, Juror Eight considered the situation before him deep within the
dimensions of empathy and skepticism. The minds that can embark on such voyages through
labyrinthine speculation

12 Angry Men Analysis
Twelve Angry Men
Recently in my AP English class, we watched The film "Twelve Angry Men". The film was unique
in the fact that it only had one setting, the Jury Room. The film showed no one else but the jurors
and the warden, who all remained completely nameless throughout the entire movie and we're only
identified by their juror numbers. The jurors were drastically different which I believe added more
diversity and made the plot more complex and intriguing to the audience. I don't believe the film
had a specific intended audience, I believe that this show can be appreciated by all audiences
because it shows that reasonable doubt is a much easier state of mind then certainty.
Over the course of the show, juror number 8 persuades every one of the other 11 jurors to
understand why he is so adamant about taking into account reasonable doubt, which in turn entices
the others to change their votes from guilty to not guilty. Juror number 8 says many times
throughout the show that he is not certain that the man didn't do it, he just has reason to believe that
there could be a possibility that he may not have been at fault for this particular crime. All of the
other jurors in the beginning of this show are stacked against him, but as he begins to explain why
he has Reasonable Doubt he wins the votes of the other 11 men.
Rose introduces the legal concept of Reasonable Doubt At the beginning of the play with 12 jurors
coming into a jury room to debate whether or not a boy,

Courtroom 302
Professor Chapleau
CJS
7 April 2013 Courtroom 203 My understanding of the court system has changed almost weekly from
the beginning of my semester. I do understand things that I never thought I would've have known or
even cared about in the least. The book Courtroom 302 has brought an even different side of
thinking into this. The book goes into detail about the criminal court in Chicago. He watches all of
the actions and different trials that come and go in the courtroom 302. He presents many different
cases throughout the book which gives more insight then just a single case. Overview of the book:
The book is written by Steve Bogira, who is a reporter for a newspaper is Chicago. He goes into the
courtroom 302 whose judge ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One of the defendants actually states "Hey you good, Why aint you become a real lawyer" (p. 138).
They think because they are getting this for free that these people representing them don't have any
idea what they are doing because the one was so good at using the facts for his client is a good way
he got him acquitted. Throughout most of the book the judge of the courtroom is up for a retention
election. He is a circuit court judge and that means he has to do a partisan election and he must get
60% majority to keep his job on the bench. This makes a huge impact on some of the decisions
judges will make in the courtroom. During the trail of white men who were going trail over beating
a young black kid who was in their neighborhood. The judge was being affected harshly by this
because if he was easy on the men then the black community would vote against him because the
beating was racially motivated. On the other hand if he gives them a harsh sentence he could be
looked at bad because these men were first time offenders. He gets accused of rushing the case
because what he planned on doing was gives the one man who was the one who did the beating a
harsh sentences and give the others probation. He wanted to get it on the record that he gave him a
harsher sentence, and even after the sentence he was telling the media all about his reasoning for
why and how he came up with this decision. He ended up give

The Nerc Effect : The CSI Effect And Juurors
Abstract
The "CSI Effect" refers to the relationship forensic television shows has on a juror's verdict
decision. Throughout the literature on the "CSI Effect", there is a discrepancy on whether or not it
actually exists. This effect causes jurors to have unrealistic high expectations of forensic science
during a trial and affect jurors' willingness to convict without some piece of evidence. A solution
proposed to overcome this effect is to ask certain question at the voir dire, which will identify jurors
who have been influenced by forensic science television shows, to remove them from the jury
selection process before the start of a trial. A second solution is creating jury instructions on how
much the investigations in real–life are different from the investigations they see on TV to correct
any misinformation and facilitate learning.
Keywords: CSI effect, forensic science television shows, jurors
The CSI Effect
The "CSI Effect" refers to the belief that juror's expectations about forensic evidence at trial are
changing due to the popularity of forensic science television shows such as CBS's CSI: Crime Scene
Investigation ( Kim, Barak, & Shelton, 2009; Hayes–Smith & Levett, 2011) . CSI is one of the most
popular shows on network television, consistently ranking and spawning several spin–off shows.
These shows depict crime scene investigators using highly technical procedures to recover
microscopic evidence that ultimately reveals the details of the

Case Study : Simpson And The Role Of Trial Consultants
Michaela Mapes
PSYC 401
Term Paper
The O.J. Simpson and the Role of Trial Consultants
The role of trial consultants in each particular case differs. These roles can vary from solely assisting
with jury selection to a full range of services including conducting community attitude surveys,
determining the effectiveness of evidence that will be used in trial, guiding attorneys through what
approach should be taken during the trial, and preparing witnesses to testify in court. The different
roles are an integral part of trial consulting as defined by the field of psychology. Field consultants
are said to provide insight and guidance on the case through the roles described above. To determine
if these roles described are that of the real world this paper will be discussing one case in particular
that highlights the differing uses for trial consultants, the O.J. Simpson trial. Simpson was a former
professional football player, idolized and known by many, who was tried for the death of his ex–
wife, Nicole Brown, and a family friend, Ronald Goldman (Ford & Newton, 1994). Many people
know this trial because of the high level of media attention it received but what is unknown to
various people is the work that was put in by trial consultants Jo–Ellan Dimitrius and Don Vinson.
During this trial, the consultants focused mainly on assisting with jury selection, conducting
community attitude surveys, and guidance on trial strategies. The trial consultants had to find a way
to work around

Case Brief

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Carmen Sanborn

More from Carmen Sanborn (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Case Brief