Citation

Hafemeister TL. Violence Vict. 1993; 8(2): 177-186.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1993, Springer Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

8193058

Abstract

That jurors may be harmed as a result of their carrying out their civic duties is receiving increased attention from the courts and the media (Sevilla & Beyers, 1990; Craver, 1993). The pilot tests reported here represent initial efforts to undertake a proactive project for identifying and mitigating the possible adverse effects of stress on jurors and to contribute to the understanding and treatment of secondary trauma for at-risk groups. In many ways juries are the black box of the legal system. Their decision-making process is typically shrouded in mystery. So that they may fully explore the issues and examine their consciences, jurors meet privately when reaching their decision and, beyond entering a verdict, are typically not required to provide the rationale for their verdict. Furthermore, jurors are often reluctant to discuss the bases for their verdicts after the trial is over and an unspoken code of honor may limit their willingness to critique their fellow jurors. Perhaps in part because we know so little about their decision-making process, as well as because of their intrinsic and symbolic importance to the legal system, there may be a tendency to take jurors for granted and to assume that they are relatively unaffected by their jury duties. Although jurors are expected to appear impassive and emotionally detached in court, for some trials it is only the rare individual who will not be emotionally moved by what he or she has seen and heard or by the gravity of the decision that is required. Several recent cases have provided a glimpse of what goes on within this black box and suggest that greater attention may need to be given to the needs of these jurors.

Language: en