- Feb 4: Welcome & Introduction
- Class Objectives, Projects, Tools, Groups
- Feb 5: Commonwealth v. Hebert
- Feb 11:
- Discuss the Hebert Prosecutor's closing argument
- Feb 12: Truth as a Resolver
- Feb 18: People of Conscience: Inherent human qualities upon which the jury process is built
- Artists without money & the Net
- Tools for Innovation
- Eddlem - AMERICAN_JURY#United_States_v._Luisi
- Feb 19: Re-enact Eddlem in Second Life
- Feb 25: Automated Justice
- Abelson, Ledeen and Lewis, âBlown to Bitsâ Chapter 6
- Jury Selection in RIAA Cases
- Relation between right to jury trial and right to public trial - courtroom in cyberspace
- March 4: Jury Selection: Nuts & Bolts - Continuing Discussion from "Runaway Jury"
- Organized by Team 1636
- March 5: Nightline Post-trial Undercover Juror Investigation
- In-Class Discussion
- March 11: Jury Consultants: Special guests: Dave Weinberg and Johanna Carrane of Juryscope. Background Document: Media:jury_consulting.pdf
- March 12: The Rodney King case and the issue of race in jury trials
- March 18: The Jury and Race: Structure
- March 19: Voting Rights Act Georgetown Panel
- April 2: Juries and the Media
- Organized by The Rural Juror
- April 8: Watch Professor Nesson in Court!
- April 9: Discuss Cusick and Dougherty
- April 15: Jury deliberations, inside the black box
- Organized by Leftovers
- April 16: Guest speaker: Dehlia Umunna, clinical instructor at Harvard Criminal Justice Institute
- April 17: Makeup Class for April 8. 3-5 pm block
- April 22: High profile cases.
- Organized by The Bedazzlers
- April 23: Psychological phenomena related to jury decision making
- April 29: Reprise of Nullification; Cusick and Dougherty
- April 30: Concluding Thoughts
Jury selection: The Nuts and Bolts
- (How jury selection works) - Claimed by 1636
- What are jurors automatically excluded for? Should they be?
Psychological phenomenon related to jury decision making
- Claimed by Runaway Jurists
Jury consultants: what they do and what they can tell us about how jurors think
Portrayal of juries in the media
- Claimed by The Rural Juror
"Jury-type" voting in reality TV shows (Survivor, Biggest Loser, etc.) compared to actual juries
- Claimed by Destiny's Child
Jury Deliberations: Inside the Black Box
- Claimed by Leftovers
Avoiding jury duty
- Claimed by Destiny's Child
How do you find a fair jury in highly publicized cases where the risk of jury contamination is high?
- Claimed by Bedazzlers
Juries as portrayed in the media
- also claimed by The Rural Juror - we are everywhere
Historical evolution of the jury
- What is the reasoning behind the size of the jury? e.g. why 12?
Unanimous verdict requirements--- good or bad?
Should there be competence requirements for jurors? Would this result in a weeding out of minorities or denial of a "jury of peers"?
Juries and damages awards. Too much? Judicial corrections of excessive damages
Will this result in a more disproportionate number of minorities being put in jail? Is there reason to think it would not?
No level of education requirement on jurors. Are we comfortable with that?
Legal theory of jury nullification - if jury nullification is permitted by law, then is it really lawlessness?
Role of jury in civil cases vs. criminal cases -Possibility of having expert juries.
Why do defendants sometimes choose to waive their right to a jury trial and instead opt for a bench trial?
How juries process expert testimony, evidence
Access to jury; structural problems at state-level, e.g. small claims courts â
Strategizing in jury selection - by attorneys, consultants - High-profile cases - special considerations?
Continuing to answer the questions raised by the lynch cases;
The importance of the rule of law and the problems posed by jury nullification: law as an expression of the will of the people; the need for immutable, enforceable guiding principles
How effective are juries in complex litigation settings? (ex. patent cases) to what extent are they influenced/manipulated by expert testimony?
What if the case is complex and the people on the jury do not understand the issues in the case?
The jury as a blackbox to give "moral certainty" to convictions. Good or bad? Alternatives?