Tag: Jury Profiling

a women being interviewed for jury selection to detect jury bias

6 Ways To Prevent Jury Bias In Your Trial

Posted on | by Peter Hecht

Jury bias can lead to unfair verdicts based on personal beliefs rather than the facts. Even jurors who seem neutral may have unconscious biases that shape their decisions. Attorneys must take steps to identify and manage these biases before and during trial. Failing to do so can put a case at risk. Here’s how to prevent jury bias in your trial.

1. Conduct Thorough Jury Selection (Voir Dire)

Ask the Right Questions

Voir dire gives attorneys the chance to uncover jury bias before the trial begins. To do this effectively, ask case-specific questions that go beyond basic demographics. A juror’s stance on law enforcement, corporate responsibility, or medical malpractice can influence their judgment.

Encourage Honest Responses

Jurors may hesitate to admit personal biases, especially in a courtroom setting. Make voir dire feel like a conversation rather than an interrogation. When jurors feel comfortable, they’re more likely to share honest opinions.

Use Open-Ended Questions

Avoid questions that lead to yes-or-no answers. Instead of asking, “Can you be fair?” ask, “How do you define fairness in a case like this?” Responses to open-ended questions reveal more about a juror’s thinking and potential biases.

2. Use Social Media and Background Research

Identify Hidden Biases

Jurors may not always disclose personal views in court, but their online activity often tells a different story. Social media, blog posts, and public comments can reveal opinions on topics relevant to the case.

Check Public Posts and Affiliations

A juror’s memberships, shared articles, or past statements can provide clues about their viewpoints. If a case involves corporate negligence, an individual who frequently posts anti-corporate opinions might struggle to remain neutral.

Avoid Ethical Pitfalls

Attorneys should follow all legal and ethical guidelines when researching jurors online. Courts have rules about how attorneys and their teams can gather this information. Improper research methods can create legal issues and damage credibility.

3. Challenge Biased Jurors with Peremptory Strikes and Challenges for Cause

Know When to Use Challenges for Cause

If a juror openly admits bias, an attorney can request their removal. Courts grant these challenges when a juror’s views could prevent them from deciding the case based solely on evidence.

Use Peremptory Strikes Strategically

Attorneys can remove jurors without giving a reason, but there are limits. Striking jurors based on race, gender, or other protected categories is not allowed. Use peremptory strikes to eliminate jurors who show subtle signs of bias, even if they don’t openly admit it.

Watch for Patterns in Juror Behavior

Body language, tone of voice, and facial expressions can hint at bias. A juror who avoids eye contact when discussing certain topics may hold unspoken views that could affect their judgment.

4. Educate Jurors on Implicit Bias

Explain Bias Without Accusations

Many jurors don’t realize their own biases. Instead of confronting them directly, frame the discussion in a neutral way. Explain that bias is a natural human tendency and that the goal is to focus only on the evidence.

Use Expert Testimony if Necessary

Bias experts can help jurors recognize their own thought patterns. When a case involves sensitive topics, expert testimony on unconscious bias can help jurors make fairer decisions.

Provide Clear Jury Instructions

Judges should give jurors clear instructions about setting aside personal opinions. Written instructions and verbal reinforcement can help ensure that jurors stay focused on the facts.

5. Monitor Jury Behavior During Trial

Observe Juror Reactions

Jurors who appear disengaged or overly reactive to certain evidence may already have a leaning. Watch for changes in facial expressions, note-taking habits, and overall attentiveness.

Request Judicial Intervention if Needed

If a juror’s behavior suggests bias, attorneys can ask the judge to address it. In some cases, the court may issue a reminder about impartiality or, in serious situations, dismiss the juror.

Consider a Mistrial in Extreme Cases

If jury bias becomes obvious and affects the fairness of the trial, requesting a mistrial may be necessary. This is a last resort, but it can prevent an unjust outcome.

6. Leverage Jury Bias Analysis Tools like JuryScout

What is JuryScout?

JuryScout, a service from Magna Legal Services, helps attorneys uncover potential biases through digital research. By analyzing jurors’ public online activity, it provides a clearer picture of their views and potential leanings. Some biases are easy to hide in court but become clear online.

How It Helps Your Case

JuryScout finds patterns in jurors’ public statements, helping attorneys make better-informed jury selection decisions. Eliminating biased jurors from the start reduces the risk of unfair decisions. JuryScout provides attorneys with valuable insights before seating a jury, making it easier to ensure a fair trial.

Take Control of Jury Bias Before It Hurts Your Case

Jury bias can shape verdicts before the first witness even takes the stand. Waiting until the trial begins to address it is too late. Magna Legal Services offers the tools and expertise to help attorneys identify, challenge, and eliminate biased jurors. Contact us today to learn how we can strengthen your case by ensuring a fair and impartial jury.

Jury Profiling: Multiple Levels of Jury Research

Posted on | by Peter Hecht

Jury “selection” does not exist in the United States. Attorneys choose individuals to serve on the jury by “deselecting” from jury service those individuals who they expect to be unfavorable to their side. Identifying and systematically eliminating pro-plaintiff or pro-defense jurors could be your secret weapon in winning a trial.

Traditional jury selection techniques are often based on stereotypical notions about the influence of juror characteristics on verdict behavior. If you’ve ever tried to connect a potential juror’s gender, race, occupation, social status, marital status, age, religion or demeanor to their tendency to vote guilty or award higher damages, then you’ve probably exercised some of these preconceptions. Needless to say, none of these stereotypes has any scientific basis.

In contrast, scientific jury profiling uses empirical techniques and systematic analysis to develop profiles of favorable and unfavorable jurors. In our experience, only multiple levels of research can predict how an individual will approach the case, evaluate evidence, and render a verdict. Statistical profiling ensures that you’re in the best possible position to seat the best jury.

Jury Research Data and Focus Groups

Trial attorneys often pride themselves on their ability to communicate complex legal theories in a simple way. But when you’re living and breathing a case for many months, it is easy for your objectivity to become compromised. Focus groups and other jury research exercises can help fine tune your arguments and begin to identify some trends in jury profiling.

A mock trial or focus group typically involves the observation of small group deliberation, based on the presentation of testimony that closely approximates an actual trial. By analyzing what mock jurors find significant, meaningful or memorable about the case, we can develop early stage profiles about whether certain attitudes and experiences are likely to be pro-plaintiff or pro-defense and helps us to advise the trial team on the effectiveness of their argument and ways to improve.

Mock jury data can be gathered in various ways, including full trial simulations, shadow juries, focus groups and online mock juries. At certain times, we favor some of these methods and/or combine two or more types of exercises in order to gain the fullest data set to prepare for a trial. It depends on the complexity and value of the case.

When gathering mock jury data, it is important to realize that the quality of the findings is wholly dependent on the quality of the methodology: Put simply, you’ll get better results if the research team is well-versed in the nature of advocacy, presentation, communication, psychology and small group behavior, and designs the study with these factors in mind.

Large-scale Juror Profiling

While traditional jury research data is extremely helpful, it is often based on a relatively small sample size, both in terms of the total number of participants and the number of focus groups. Sample size is a key determinant of how much weight to ascribe to research results. Generally, smaller sample size groups should be interpreted with caution since the group’s characteristics may have been the primary cause of the outcome; they are not predictive in the statistical sense. This is particularly important when evaluating damage awards or responsibility allocations, which are the least reliable types of data.

Because of these limitations, we recommend large-scale juror profiling studies. Massive community profiling allows us to validate the initial profiles developed through our jury research, and determine with statistical certainty what types of jurors are likely to favor the plaintiff versus the defense in your case.

Large-scale profiling is a multifaceted protocol. It starts with one or more large-scale community perception surveys, which we administer with the intent of uncovering community attitudes and biases to each party’s respective position in the case. Research consistently shows that pre-existing attitudes are more predictive of verdict behavior than the potential juror’s experiences; and experiences are significantly more predictive than demographics.

In other words, it is not enough to find out what experiences the potential jurors had, but also what they learned from these experiences. Essentially, we’re using big data about ordinary people, such as their social media activity, to develop a statistically reliable verdict-orientation model based on what motivates people to think the way they do.

The impressions we collect allow us to develop and gain a more nuanced understanding of the kinds of jurors who would be more receptive to the plaintiff’s position than they would be to the defense case. Correlated with mock jury data, this can help us narrow down potential voir dire questions to those which we know are reliable predictors of verdict orientation. The goal is to help the trial team effectively identify and deselect jurors who cannot and never will be persuaded.

Final Thoughts

“Almost every case has been won or lost when the jury is sworn,” legendary defense attorney Clarence Darrow once claimed. That may be an exaggeration, but getting even a small edge can turn the tables in a difficult case. Jury profiling can give you that edge — as long as it’s the right type of profiling. Piecemeal small-scale mock juries have less value than aggregated results gathered from multiple data points and deeper statistical analysis.

Just as you evaluate cases in a critical manner, evaluate the quality of the research service used with the same considered eye. Choosing a consultant who applies multiple layers of rigor to their analysis ensures the quality of your data and assigns a degree of much-needed confidence to the results you have obtained. It can make all the difference.

If you’re ready to learn more about Magna’s jury profiling services, contact Magna Legal Services today.

Request a Complimentary Case Consultation >>

Related Articles:

5 Unique Tips to Jury Selection for Civil Cases
How the Pandemic Affects Juror Perspectives
JuryConfirm