权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Preventing improper juror conduct and ensuring effective jury deliberations

防止陪审员不当行为并确保有效的陪审团审议

基本信息

批准号：
ES/J000876/1
负责人：
Cheryl Thomas
金额：
$ 11.26万
依托单位：
University College London
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2011
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2011 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FJ000876%2F1
关键词：
Preventing improper juror conduct ensuring

项目摘要

In recent years juror use of the internet during criminal trials has resulted in numerous mistrials, causing substantial financial costs to the criminal court system and personal distress and hardship to victims and witnesses who must give difficult evidence again at retrials, and posing the threat of possible miscarriages of justice. The 2010 study Are Juries Fair? was able to establish three key facts about juries for the first time in this country:1. A quarter of jurors on high profile cases had seen information about their case on the internet during trial2. Almost half of all jurors did not know or were uncertain what constituted improper jury conduct3. The majority of jurors what more information about how to conduct jury deliberations The initial findings of Are juries Fair? raise serious doubts about whether jurors do in fact understand what improper juror conduct is and how to conduct deliberations. Therefore this follow-on research to Are Juries Fair? is designed to answer two crucial questions about jurors and the jury system in this country:1. How can jurors be prevented from improperly using the internet during trials?2. How can jurors be provided with guidance that will ensure effective jury deliberations?This research has been identified by senior members of the Judiciary of England and Wales, Her Majesty's Court Service and other criminal justice stakeholders as the top priority area for further jury research following the 2010 report Are Juries Fair?. Using a multi-staged approach and working exclusively with real juries at Crown Courts, this research will provide answers to these crucial questions and will establish new tools to be used in jury trials to ensure proper conduct and effective deliberations. This research draws on the established jury research expertise of the UCL Jury Project team and has secured in advance the support and cooperation of key members of the criminal justice system in order to conduct this research.The objective of the research is to ensure that the findings of Are Juries Fair? are carried forward to create new tools which jurors clearly need and want in order to fulfill their unique and crucial role in the criminal justice system. This in turn will ensure that trial by jury can survive the digital age and will continue to play a crucial role in a 21st century criminal justice system.

近年来，陪审员在刑事审判期间使用互联网导致大量无效审判，给刑事法院系统造成了巨大的经济成本，给受害者和证人带来了个人痛苦和困难，他们必须在重审时再次提供困难的证据，并对可能的司法不公构成威胁。2010年的研究陪审团公平吗？在这个国家第一次能够确定关于陪审团的三个关键事实：1.在备受瞩目的案件中，四分之一的陪审员在审判期间在互联网上看到了关于他们案件的信息2。几乎一半的陪审员不知道或不确定什么构成不正当的陪审团行为。大多数陪审员关于如何进行陪审团审议的更多信息是关于陪审团的初步调查结果的吗？对陪审员是否真的理解陪审员的不当行为以及如何进行审议提出了严重质疑。因此，这项关于陪审团公平的后续研究？旨在回答关于陪审员和这个国家的陪审团制度的两个关键问题：1.如何防止陪审员在审判期间不适当地使用互联网？2.如何为陪审员提供指导，以确保有效的陪审团审议？这项研究已被英格兰和威尔士司法机构的高级成员、女王陛下的法院服务机构和其他刑事司法利益攸关方确定为2010年报告《陪审团公平吗？》之后进一步陪审团研究的首要领域。这项研究采用多阶段方法，仅与刑事法院的真实陪审团合作，将为这些关键问题提供答案，并将建立用于陪审团审判的新工具，以确保适当的进行和有效的审议。这项研究借鉴了伦敦大学学院陪审团项目团队的成熟陪审团研究专业知识，并事先获得了刑事司法系统主要成员的支持和合作，以进行这项研究。研究的目的是确保陪审团的调查结果公平？陪审员显然需要和想要创造新的工具，以履行他们在刑事司法系统中的独特和关键作用。这反过来将确保陪审团审判能够在数字时代生存下来，并将继续在21世纪的刑事司法系统中发挥关键作用。