The Imagined Juror

Examines the outsized influence of jurors on prosecutorial discretion Thanks to television and popular media, the jury is deeply embedded in the American public’s imagination of the legal system. For the country’s federal prosecutors, however, jurors have become an increasingly rare sight. Today, in fact, less than 2% of their cases will proceed to an actual jury trial. And yet, when federal prosecutors describe their jobs and what the profession means to them, the jury is a central theme. Anna Offit’s The Imagined Juror examines the counterintuitive importance of jurors in federal prosecutors’ work at a moment when jury trials are statistically in decline. Drawing on extensive field research among federal prosecutors, the book represents “the first ethnographic study of US attorneys,” according to legal scholar Annelise Riles. It describes a world of legal practice in which jurors are frequently summoned—as make-believe audiences for proposed arguments, hypothetical evaluators of evidence, and invented decision-makers who would work together to reach a verdict. Even the question of moving forward with a prosecution often hinges on how federal prosecutors assume a jury will react to elements of the case—an exercise where the perspectives of the public are imagined and incorporated into every stage of trial preparation. Based on these findings, Offit argues that the decreasing number of jury trials at the federal level has not eliminated the influence of the jury but altered it. As imaginary figures, jurors continue to play an important and understudied role in shaping the work and professional identities of federal prosecutors. At the same time, imaginary jurors are not real jurors, and prosecutors at times caricature the public by leaning on stereotypes or preconceived and simplistic ideas about how laypeople think. Imagined jurors, it turns out, are a critical, if flawed, resource for introducing lay perspective into the legal process. As Offit shows, recentering laypeople and achieving the democratic promise of our legal system will require renewed commitment to the jury trial and juries that reflect the diversity of the American public.

"If you ask a federal prosecutor to describe an average day at work, chances are you will not hear about a jury trial. Yet when prosecutors talk about how they do their jobs and what their jobs mean to them, jurors seem to be everywhere. It is the figure and role of this 'make-believe' or 'imagined' juror in the professional lives of prosecutors that is the subject of this book. Drawing on an extended ethnographic study of federal prosecutors, it explores this paradoxical feature of the federal legal landscape: though laypeople only infrequently participate in federal trials, make-believe jurors have an outsized presence in the decision-making and professional imagination of some of our most powerful legal actors. In their imagined jurors, prosecutors discover a critical resource for making sense of their ill-defined directives to seek justice and represent the United States. They also find a means of thinking of discussing mercy, acknowledging evolving community mores, and discovering themselves as moral actors rather than line attorneys carrying out supervisors' directives. Even in a period of infrequent jury trials, this book shows, the very existence of the jury system-and the possibility of facing a jury-use their discretion with reference to views of others. At the same time, it highlights the limitation of legal system where jurors are primarily imaginary, calling for reforms that would foster a more inclusive and effective American jury"--

There are three concepts that are central to this work, to law, and to music. One is imagination (self-creativity). The second is relating (the ability to tell a story or compose a symphony and relate it to a jury). Third, and most importantly, is learning to overcome the biggest deficit of a lawyer and the most important attribute of a composerlistening.

Over 23 chapters this Handbook reflects the diversity of methodological approaches employed in the emerging field of narrative criminology.

We, the Jury is the dramatic story of seven jurors, who convicted Scott Peterson of murdering his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, despite a series of internal battles that brought the first major murder trial of the 21st century to the brink of a mistrial. The Peterson jurors argued and disagreed but eventually bonded to seal the fate of the icy killer who dumped his victims into the bullet-gray waters of San Francisco Bay. The seven jurors of We, the Jury were seven average Americans who never imagined the horrors they would face or the phantoms that would haunt them after they convicted the enigmatic murderer and recommended that he be put to death. This is the story of how the American jury system worked after being battered by critics for the way it functioned in the trials of O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson. Unlike the jurors in those trials, who second-guessed themselves, the Peterson jurors do not question their decisions. It wasn’t one thing that condemned Scott Peterson, it was everything.

This book discusses the conscious and unconscious psychological factors that influence juror decision-making. Jurors inevitably rely on the same "thinking tools" at trial that they use to solve problems and make decisions in their everyday lives, which makes it almost impossible for them to divorce instinct and emotion from decision-making. Their fight-or-flight reflexes are stimulated not only by predators but by information that makes them fear for their personal safety—even if the threatening information is something they merely imagine. Because self-preservation is a primal instinct, jurors tend to unconsciously respond by disregarding or altering the "threatening" evidence. Information that conflicts with their personal beliefs and biases often elicits a similar response. Therefore, what jurors hear and remember about a case will inevitably be a reflection of who they are, what they value, and what their life experiences have been. Because jurors unconsciously weigh information in a hierarchical fashion, the "hierarchy of juror decision-making" can serve as a blueprint for creating strategies to counteract the most common thinking errors that can skew jurors' perceptions of the case. This is a valuable weapon that should be in every trial lawyer's arsenal.

This is a psychological thriller about a young woman threatened by the Mafia who must return a verdict of 'not guilty' to ensure the safety of her son. The book has been turned into a movie, feturing Alec Baldwin and Demi Moore.