Monday, August 27, 2018
Forty-nine states, the federal government, and the District of Colombia statutorily limit convicted felons’ opportunities to serve as jurors. One of the primary justifications for felon juror exclusion alleges that convicted felons harbor an inherent bias in favor of criminal defendants and adversarial towards prosecutorial agents. The justification presumes that such a bias would undermine the impartiality of the jury. This exploratory field study builds on prior research examining the pre-trial biases of convicted felons and is the first to assess 1) jurisdictional approaches to law enforcement juror eligibility criteria and 2) the pre-trial biases of law enforcement personnel. To do so, this study surveys 211 active law enforcement personnel using the Revised Juror Bias Scale and compares that data to prior studies of convicted felons’ pre-trial biases. Results indicate that law enforcement personnel, as a group, harbor a pro-prosecution pre-trial bias as strong as the pro-defense pre-trial bias exhibited by convicted felons. Still, while the vast majority of jurisdictions exclude convicted felons from jury service, only a handful bar law enforcement personnel from the venire. These results ostensibly call into question the empirical validity of the inherent bias rationale and the true purpose for felon juror exclusion statutes.
This exploratory study is the first to examine how convicted felons view the jury process and their role in that process. Data derived from interviews with former and prospective felon-jurors in Maine, the only US jurisdiction that does not restrict a convicted felon’s opportunity to serve as a juror, reveal that participants displayed an idealized view of jury service, stressing a commitment to serve conscientiously. Additionally, inclusion in the jury process affirmed their transitions from “offenders” to “non-offenders.” In response, participants exhibited a sense of particularized self-worth, emphasizing that negative experiences with the criminal justice system make one a more effective juror. In sum, this study suggests that among convicted felons, inclusion in the jury process may prompt conformity with the “ideal juror” role, facilitate prosocial identity shifts by mitigating the “felon” label, and help former offenders to find personal value.
Maine is the only jurisdiction in the United States that places no limitations on a convicted felon’s juror eligibility. Instead, Maine screens prospective felon-jurors using their normal jury selection procedures. In recent years, scholars have suggested that meaningful community engagement can help facilitate former offenders’ reintegration and criminal desistance. From that theoretical posture, a number of empirical studies have explored the connection between participation in the electorate and the reentry of former offenders. Those studies suggest that voting has the potential to prompt pro-social changes among former offenders. Still, to date, no research has focused on jury service as a form of civic inclusion that may foster successful reintegration and criminal desistance. Drawing on data derived from a large-scale field study in Maine, the present article addresses this research void, arguing that the jury is perfectly positioned as a tool for change, employable by jurisdictions seeking to facilitate the successful reentry of former offenders. This article further notes that Maine is the only U.S. jurisdiction that has exploited this transformative power of the jury process.
This exploratory study is the first to examine how courtroom personnel conceive of and navigate Maine’s unique policy of felon-juror inclusion. Findings derived from interviews with trial judges and trial attorneys in Maine, the only US jurisdiction that does not restrict a convicted felon’s opportunity to serve as a juror, reveal that participants ostensibly reject the criminology of the other, instead viewing former offenders as individual fellow citizens who contribute to and benefit from their inclusion in the jury process. These views also tend to shape jury selection in Maine, as participants reported taking a case-specific, personalized approach to the screening of felon-jurors. For felon-jurors with a sexual offense, however, some participants refused to acknowledge the possibility of reformation, intimating that all such offenders lack the character to engage in the jury process. In sum, this study suggests that among courtroom personnel in Maine, the criminology of the other has little influence on their conceptualizations and treatment of almost all potential felon-jurors.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2018/08/binnall-on-convicts-on-juries.html
Binnall on Convicts on Juries curated from CrimProf Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment