What I teach Harvard Law School students about the importance of opening arguments and how a majority of jurors make up their minds about a case after hearing them.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in Manhattan Criminal Court on April 19, 2024.
Sarah Yenesel - Pool/Getty Images
A retired federal judge sheds light on what’s going on in Judge Lewis Kaplan’s courtroom during the latest trial involving former President Donald Trump.
Can anyone say they haven’t seen any news about Donald Trump and the 2020 election?
Raymond Boyd/Getty Images
Trump’s lawyers, and those prosecuting him, aren’t the only ones grappling with the problem of finding unbiased jurors in the age of social media.
Trust in the ability of the police to investigate rape cases has been severely hampered by very public failings such as the murder of Sarah Everard.
Shutterstock
In England and Wales perpetrators of one of the gravest violent crimes, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, are very unlikely to receive any punishment at all
In the end, we must accept there are flaws in jury processes. But finding alternatives has proved difficult, hence the reluctance of governments to abandon the status quo.
Ben Livings, University of South Australia and Rick Sarre, University of South Australia
The dangers of allowing extraneous “research” are twofold. First, such evidence is not subject to the rules of admissibility. Second, it isn’t subject to the rigours of cross-examination.
Video evidence at trial played a crucial part in the conviction of a police officer for the 2020 murder of George Floyd.
AP Photo/Ben Gray
Cognitive scientists are investigating the ways relative factors like new options and the order they’re presented influence your choices and beliefs.
Four of the 10 federal prisoners executed this year: Wesley Purkey, killed July 16; Dustin Honken, killed July 17; Brandon Bernard, killed Dec. 10; and Alfred Bourgeois, killed Dec. 11. In some cases, survivors of their victims addressed the court.
AP Photo
Victim impact statements give survivors a voice in the criminal justice process. But research shows their wrenching personal testimonies may not bring closure and can add racial bias into sentencing.