Dateline: September, 2007, Issue 1
**previous research updates can be found in the Jury Research Kollectionn at www.kkcomcon.com
When are juries more likely than judges to convict criminal defendants?
In 1966, Kalven and Zeisel found that judges agreed with criminal verdicts 78% of the time. In 2005, Eisenberg and colleagues examined a new database of criminal trials and found essentially the same rate of judge-jury agreement.
Eisenberg and colleagues report, however, that judges and juries differentially convict based on evidence strength, with judges having a lower conviction threshold than juries.
The researchers made three primary findings:
(1) Judges tend to convict more than juries in cases of "middle" evidentiary strength.
(2) Judges acquit more than juries in cases in which judges regard the evidence favoring the prosecution as weak.
(3) Judges convict more than juries in cases in which judges regard the evidence favoring the prosecution as strong.
In sum, criminal defendants are benefited by opting for a bench trial when the evidence is weak, and a jury trial otherwise.
Source: Kalven, H. & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
Source: Eisenberg, T., Hannaford-Agor, P. L., Hans, V. P., Waters, N. L., Munsterman, G. T., Schwab, S. J. & Wells, M. T. (2005). Judge-jury agreement in criminal cases: A partial replication of Kalven and Zeisel's The American Jury. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2, pp. 171-207.
Ó 2007, ComCon KATHY KELLERMANN COMMUNICATION CONSULTING
LITIGATION, TRIAL & JURY CONSULTANT FIRM