Storytelling Rituals in Jury Deliberations

Author:

Rossner Meredith1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. London School of Economics

Abstract

Research on jury deliberation tends to focus on deliberative outcomes, such as verdict decisions. Less attention is paid to the actual process of deliberation. This paper analyzes a video recording of a mock jury deliberation in a simulated criminal trial, focusing on facial expression, gesture, and discourse. Drawing on ethnomethodology and micro-sociological theories of ritual, I examine how jurors make sense of the evidence presented to them and how they work together to collectively produce a coherent narrative of events. I argue that a focus on the ritual dynamics of the deliberation help to understand how such a co-production can occur. La investigación sobre la deliberación del jurado tiende a centrarse en los resultados de esa deliberación, como pueden ser los veredictos. Menos atención genera el proceso mismo de deliberación. Este artículo analiza una grabación de vídeo de la deliberación de un jurado en un simulacro de juicio penal, y se fija especialmente en las expresiones faciales, los gestos y los discursos. Basándome en la etnometodología y en teorías de ritual microsociológicas, examino la forma en que los jurados buscan el sentido de las pruebas que se les presentan y la forma en que trabajan juntos para producir una narración coherente de los hechos. Argumento que poner el énfasis en las dinámicas rituales de la deliberación ayuda a entender cómo se realiza esa producción colectiva.

Funder

Criminology Research Advisory Council, Australian Institute of Criminology

Publisher

Onati International Institute for the Sociology of Law

Subject

Law,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference83 articles.

1. Atkinson, J.M., and Heritage, J., eds., 1984. Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

2. Bennet, W.L., and Feldman, M., 1981. Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom: Justice and Judgment in American Culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

3. Bornstein, B.H., 1999. The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and human Behavior [online], 23(1), pp. 75-91. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022326807441 [Accessed 24 May 2019].

4. Bornstein, B.H., and McCabe, S.G., 2005. Jurors of the absurd-the role of consequentiality in jury simulation research. Florida State University Law Review [online], 32(2), p. 443. Available from: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol32/iss2/7 [Accessed 24 May 2019].

5. Bornstein, B.H., et al., 2017. Mock juror sampling issues in jury simulation research: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior [online], 41(1), p. 13. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000223 [Accessed 24 May 2019].

Cited by 7 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3