The legal system has been developing under the influence of various sciences. The role of psychology should not be underestimated in this respect. Psychology focuses on studying and analyzing human behavior. It investigates essential motives for crime commitments. Knowing human nature makes it possible to understand the reasons for crimes, fairly judge, and prevent them. The process of jury selection has always been a controversial issue. Although some of the methods used by psychologists are regarded as unethical, they comprise an integral part of the jury selection process as far as they represent different psychological concepts for a reasonable choice of jurors.
The trial by jury exemplifies the way citizens of the country or state take part in the judicial system. Such a system represents the democratic approach to the legal system where people handle verdicts. Some scholars argue that trial by jury is not the right method of law proceedings. People can be biased, prejudiced, or mere emotionally predisposed to make wrong decisions (Greene & Heilbrun, 2013). Many kinds of research have been conducted to explore the truth concerning the jury’s decision-making. This legal tradition is already deep-rooted. Thus, the problem of the jury’s choice arose. Psychologists often serve as consultants in this process. They employ various concepts to find the most appropriate representatives.
The community survey is one of the concepts used by psychologists to choose jurors. Very often, courts apply to forensic psychologists asking them to conduct an investigation of the possible jury. According to Fulero and Wrightsman (2008), a community survey is aimed at defining whether the person has some prejudices concerning the guilt of the defendant. Usually, the court offers a considerable payment for the community study. Thus, the consultant investigates two different communities — the target one, and the other community from the distant region and compares their levels of bias and knowledge.
One more survey is known as voir dire. It is one of the most well-known approaches. Psychologists use their knowledge to analyze the voir dire concept from another perspective. During this process, the judge asks potential jurors questions concerning their readiness to be impartial or attitude towards the crime. The psychologists evaluate respondents’ verbal and non-verbal language and choose the most suitable candidates (Krauss & Liebermann, 2012).
Forensic psychologists may suggest conducting a mock trial or focus group research. Mock trial copies the process of the real trial. During mock trials, attorneys may create their speeches in such a way that it will help to understand the real attitude of the prospective jurors concerning the case.
The modern world allows psychologists to use the Internet and social media to make their investigations. However, this may be regarded as interference in private life. In this case, consultants face the problem of law enforcement and an ethical issue. People disapprove of using their personal information. However, there are no legal regulations for it. Even more, some states consider this method appropriate. For instance, in Texas, every attorney has the iPad for being able to do online research (Stark, 2011). One may observe that there is a tendency for implementing legal regulations allowing the usage of information from the Internet.
Psychologists who serve as consultants in the jury selection process become an integral part of the modern judicial system. They employ various methods to investigate the potential jurors and analyze data to choose the most appropriate candidates. Psychologists may use personal information for these purposes. Thus, the ethical issue concerning the violation of the right for private life arises.
References
Fulero, S., & Wrightsman, L. (2008). Forensic Psychology. Boston, USA: Cengage Learning. Web.
Greene, E., & Heilbrun, K. (2013). Wrightsman’s Psychology and the Legal System. Boston, USA: Cengage Learning. Web.
Krauss, D., & Liebermann, J. (2012). Jury Psychology: Social Aspects of Trial Processes. Farnham, United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Web.
Stark, D. (2011). Juror Investigation: Is In-Courtroom Internet Research Going Too Far? Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, 7(2), 93-104. Web.