The occupational hazards of jury duty.

Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law

Department of Psychiatry, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, OH 45267-0559.

Published: December 1992

Jurors on criminal trials carry a considerable burden of responsibility. They determine the defendant's fate. Additionally, during trials they can be exposed to stressful, frightening, and sordid aspects of life. The stressfulness varies depending upon the nature of the trial, its length, the nature of the testimony and evidence, the jurors' interpersonal relationships, the difficulty establishing guilt or innocence, the public's attitude, etc. These experiences can create psychological and/or physical discomfort that can be transient and mildly or moderately intense, or more serious and constitute illness. The authors have studied juries of four criminal trials--two murder cases, one child abuse case, and one obscenity case. Forty jurors were interviewed. Twenty-seven had one or more discomforting physical and/or physiological symptoms. These involved gastrointestinal distress (10 jurors); generalized nervousness (4 jurors); heart palpitation (6 jurors); headaches (4 jurors); sexual inhibitions (4 jurors); depression (4 jurors); anorexia (4 jurors); faintness (2 jurors); and numbness, lump in throat, chest pain, hives, and flu (1 juror each). Seven of the jurors became clearly ill. Illnesses included: peptic ulcer reactivation and hives, phobic reaction, anxiety state and increased alcohol use, hypertensive episode and visual scotomata, sexual inhibition, chills, fever, and depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Download full-text PDF

Source

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

jurors
11
occupational hazards
4
hazards jury
4
jury duty
4
duty jurors
4
jurors criminal
4
criminal trials
4
trials carry
4
carry considerable
4
considerable burden
4

Similar Publications

We sought to test the effects of sexual assault form and complainant/defendant gender on jurors' perceptions of the prototypicality of a sexual assault case, complainant, and defendant. We examined whether these perceived prototypicality measures predict mock jurors' complainant/defendant blame and credibility assessments and if these assessments predict verdict decisions in a simulated sexual assault trial. We predicted that the female complainant-male defendant condition, vaginal intercourse condition, and their combination would be perceived as more prototypical than their counterparts, which would predict blame/credibility assessments, ultimately predicting verdict.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Jurors rely on evidence presented in court to find the facts of a case. Consequently, the manner in which evidence is delivered may significantly impact the extent to which jurors comprehend and interpret the evidence. Building on a pilot study, the aim of this research was to further investigate which format for presenting forensic medical evidence in court was best for laypersons (i.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objectives: Prior research indicates that jury duty can be distressing for some jurors. This study examined: (1) the influence of prior trauma characteristics (type, exposure, time since trauma), medical fear and mental health difficulties on stress and emotional responses during a mock trial and 1 week later; and (2) associations between early stress reactions during a trial on subsequent stress and emotional reactivity after exposure to skeletal evidence and 1 week later.

Methods: Mock jurors (n = 180) completed baseline self-report mental health measures, read a summary of a murder case and were then exposed to graphic skeletal evidence.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: As the world's population ages, there is a growing concern with frailty, marked by reduced strength and greater vulnerability to stress. Overcoming obstacles like reluctance towards screening methods in this process is crucial for identifying and addressing frailty at an early stage. Understanding older people's perspectives can help adapt screening procedures in primary healthcare settings.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Autonomy and independence are key features of legal decision-making. Yet, decision-making in court is fundamentally interactional and collective, both during the information gathering phase of hearings, and in evaluations during deliberations. Depending on legal system and type of court, deliberations can include different constellations of lay judges, jurors, or judge panels.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!