THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 1

The One Decision: The Impact of Juror

Bias in a Trial
Rushi Patel
Independent Research G/T I
01 May 2018
Advisor: Khadar Diria
Instructor: E. Leila Chawkat
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 2

Abstract:

This paper will discuss and attempt to prove the correlation between minorities of people,

the likelihood of being struck in the process of voir dire and discuss reduction methods of

different forms of biases. The review of literature introduces different forms of biases and their

effects respectively. It also provides various different reduction methods of different biases.

Additionally, the data collection section not only proves that minorities get removed most often

in the jury pool but will explore the reasons why minorities get removed from the jury selection

pool. Finally, the analysis section conveys how minorities are being dismissed and explores the

different connections between minorities and being removed. The analysis section finds common

correlations between various amounts of studies and determines a grand conclusion to why

minorities are typically left out in jury duty.

Table of Contents:

I. Introduction……………………………….…………………………………………Page 3

II. Review of Literature..……………………………….………………………………Page 3

III. Research Methods and Data Collection….………………………………………. Page 11

IV. Results and Data

Analysis……………………………….…………………………………………..Page 16

V. Discussion And

Conclusion……………………………….…………………………………………Page 18

VI. Citations: ……………………………….…………………………………………Page 19

THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 3

Introduction:

The law is a powerful tool that controls society by merely just words on a paper, but can

be taken advantage of when a person’s life hangs in the balance. Laws are rules, regulations, and

restrictions that apply to all members of society. It can shape people’s conduct and enforce

penalties for improper behavior. Without them, societies and civilizations may descend into a

world filled with injustice. To protect the social harmony, the laws are enforced through judicial

adjudications at different levels of the court system. Among the most common enforcement

procedures is the jury selection, where a selected group of people are chosen fairly and

accurately to decide a verdict in a case. However, the law is unable to control the behavior or

judgment of people. For this reason, misjudgments may send an innocent person to jail or free a

guilty party. The term to connote all this is called juror bias, where the social status (race,

economic class, profession, etc.) of the juror can affect how they interpret different pieces of

evidence. Though juror bias may never be eliminated, it can be reduced to make cases more fair

and accurate to the evidence given. Juror bias reduction can be achieved by reducing the number

of people that make an immediate decision and stay with it, the amount of racial bias by

diversifying the jury pool, and the amount of impulsive thinking within jurors.

Review Of Literature:

There are multiple factors that affect jurors’ decisions. One of the most influential factors

that affects juror pools dramatically is implicit racial bias (Mckneely, 2017). The origins of this

bias are from the stereotypes developed in social groups in the past centuries (Cohen and

Rosales, 2007). Racial bias can make people cling onto an outdated and incomplete definition of

individuals. Bias is created when individuals establish associations between a group of people
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 4

and particular traits, while often unaware of their wrongdoing. Typically, racial bias tends to

create stereotypes of defendants that are minorities in the criminal system (Clemons, 2014).

People who hold these unconscious beliefs are likely unaware that they possess implicit racial

bias and thus unlikely to admit to having any (Greely, 2012). Whereas explicit racial bias is the

complete opposite of implicit racial bias. Explicit racial bias is open attitudes and beliefs about

people of other social groups. In explicit racial biases, people are more self aware about their

opinions about different ethnicities. While implicit racial bias is more immediate and expressed

at an unconscious level (Clemons, 2014). Racial bias is believed to influence most juror’s

decisions in a criminal trial. This is because many jurors believe that African defendants are

associated with criminal attributes or negative characteristics that suggest the defendant’s

guiltiness (Cohen and Rosales, 2007). During voir dire, very few African citizens are actually

selected for being jurors. A study shows that, “Out of the 64 % that had the potential to receive a

spot [in the jury service] only 28% of them actually got it” (Anwar, Bayer, Hjalmarsson, 2011).

Commonly, minorities are rarely ever selected for jury duty. Unlike, white jurors who tend to be

closed most of the time from the jury selection pool. This practice complicates the verdict

because white jurors tend to have the consistency to be harsh and have the defendants they judge

be guilty of the charges (Mckneely, 2017). Other minority groups, such as Hispanics are hugely

underrepresented within jury duty (Cooper, 2011). Only 6% of Hispanics is used in juror pools in

comparison to the 77.7% of whites that were used.

Another factor that can affect jurors’ decisions in court cases is confirmation biases.

Confirmation bias consists of many other different forms of biases held by jurors. One type of

confirmation bias is selective thinking. This type of thinking has the jurors only take into
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 5

consideration evidence that proves their own side of a criminal case, whether innocent or guilty

(O’Brien, 2017). In good conditions, jurors take into consideration both the defendants and

prosecutors’ evidence equally. Jurors are demanding to have fair and impartial decision making

when being introduced in a criminal case. However, jurors hold confirmation biases that make

them imply selective thinking. Usually, jurors try to find evidence that proves that the defendant

guilty and often ignores any evidence that proves otherwise. Commonly, racial biases are

integrated within confirmation biases because stereotypes can create bad judgment on the

defendant, where jurors may attempt to confirm their judgments by declaring them guilty

(O’Brien, 2017). Additionally, eyewitness identifications are the most influential when it comes

to criminal trials (Cooper, et, 2011). Direct evidence such as eyewitness identifications create a

certainty within jurors to believe what the prosecutor is saying is true. Irrational thinking can

affect jurors’ decisions dramatically as it can nullify the available evidence. This is because

irrational thinking (confirmation bias) can ruin the accuracy of evidence. Jurors may make

misinterpretations of evidence that may have changed the verdict of a case (Bornstein, 2013).

Confirmation bias may affect jurors’ decisions because if a juror was only trying to think

someone of being guilty, there will not be much of a defense. Jurors have expectations and tend

to keep those expectations and beliefs within the entirety of the case (Mckneely, 2017).

The second type of confirmation biases is the usage of extraneous information. This type

of inclination is evident when jurors imply their own knowledge and beliefs about law or facts

and integrate them into the case. Extraneous information can make jurors have their decisions

skewed in one way (Liska, 2017). Jurors also use their worldly prior experiences to indicate the

juror’s feelings about the topic at hand (O’Brien, 2015). An example of this is when someone has
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 6

good experiences with doctors, jurors wouldn’t doubt their reliability when lawyers provide

expert witnesses (doctors) to the stand. Typically the foundations of these biases are based on the

juror’s prior experiences. Potential experience biases can be separated into three categories: “(a)

experiences that lead to viewing the defendant and/or defense witnesses more favorably, (b)

experiences that lead to viewing the plaintiff and/or the plaintiff's witnesses in a negative light,

and (c) experiences that lead to viewing the actions of the plaintiff negatively” (Frederick, 1995).

Extraneous information can affect jury decisions because it risks the introduction of having new

information in the case that was not allowed and can alter a decision of a case. Specialists in a

specific topic in the case may have different interpretations in comparison to what an average

person would not know (Liska, 2017). Having new information brought in by the jurors

themselves can create many conflicts to occur within cases. The jurors that bring in extraneous

information not introduced in the trial can result in the reliability of experts to be lowered, and

ruin the validity of the case.

The third and final type of confirmation biases is loss aversion. This bias tends to have

jurors weight losses more than potential gains, which is similar conceptually to confirmation

biases. An example of aversion bias when, one was to have evidence that shows that a defendant

had an alibi for the day a crime was committed and other evidence to link the gun back to him,

the jurors typically will weigh the gun link and ignore the legitimate alibi he had (Foote et,

1996).

Another factor that affects juror’s decisions is the gender bias. Gender bias typically has

stereotypical thinking about the roles of sex and undermines the credibility of women

(Bribriesco). Women are often seen by male jurors as innocent and weak and can lead to
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 7

innocent verdicts. In the late 1990s, a court had initiated the “Equal Protection Clause” making

it improper to strike potential jurors based on gender. This clause had later extended to Maryland

and was later adopted by the Supreme Court for gender being the sole reason to challenge seating

a juror (“Use of Gender in Jury Selection,” 2018). Additionally, other research has been

discovered that “the tendency for female jurors to convict more than male jurors (Forster Lee

2006)... Further supported by findings from a large study published by the Ministry of Justice,

which looked at the jurors’ verdict choices in real-life cases as well as mock cases (Thomas).”

However, females are more likely to change their mind much more easily compared to male

jurors (Bray, 2011). Gender bias is a problem because jurors typically disapprove of those that

have a negative connotation of people who are divorced. Additionally, another reason gender

bias affects jurors is that men jurors tend to be more lenient when there is a woman defendant,

because as they are seen as innocent in society (Bribriesco, 2010). In criminal cases that concern

domestic violence, female jurors view the offense more seriously and are inclined to convict the

criminal due to a sympathy for the victim, who is typically a female. The overall effect that these

biases hold is that they can all lead an innocent person to suffer the consequences of the true

criminal in the act. This will overall lead to more crimes by the true criminal while the innocent

person is rotting in jail for the true criminal deeds. Furthermore, the innocent person will be more

likely to be committing acts of violence once they are out of prison ("Outing bail;

Criminal-justice reform, 2017).

Racial biases can be reduced by implementing a stratified jury pool. This is a process of

forming strata between each race and randomly selecting a representative number. This type of

selection allows minorities to be more likely to be chosen for jury duty. The idea of having
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 8

stratified jury pools has not been introduced by policymakers but is a possible solution to the

reduction of racial biases. By having strata it will make the jury pool representative, so the pool

will not be consisting of mainly white Americans. Having stratified jury pools will allow

minorities to be heard in criminal cases. Forming strata will allow each race to be nearly equal in

the jury pool allowing for more fairer decisions to come. Another option of reducing bias is a

race implicit association test. This is an online test developed by researchers to measure the

number of biases one holds (Clemons, 2014). The test measures levels of biases where and when

they reach a certain bias level, the juror is to be struck down and eliminated from consideration.

This can reduce the number of racial biases held in jury pools, and can result in better and fairer

decisions. Gender bias can be reduced if jurors were to take similar tests to the IAT test. This

will be used to determine the amount of gender bias someone holds. This will help with reducing

gender bias because similar to the option for racial bias, lawyers will be able to strike those who

would be significantly biased to a specific case. Though this test may be hard to accomplish

because it may result in social issues about the role of genders and how the common man/women

are viewed in society.

An option to reduce confirmation bias is questioning the credibility of the plaintiff.

Typically, when a plaintiff is telling the juror the bad deeds done by a person, the defendant can

question the credibility of the plaintiff. This may possibly make what the plaintiff says less

believable, allowing jurors to hopefully switch their opinionated one-sided decisions into a

balanced decision where both sides are considered. A second option of reducing confirmation

bias is the three-prong test. This approach is used to seek whether a juror will commit

misconduct. The three components in the three-pronged test, are, “If a juror uses experience or
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 9

knowledge that is not within a common knowledge. An express juror's opinion must have a

concern with material only in the case, cannot bring in new information. Must have their

opinions be displayed to everyone on the jury, rather than keep to themselves about the material

in the case” (Liska, 2017). The three-pronged test is beneficial to reducing jury selection pools

because if a potential juror happens to be, for example, a forensic science specialist, they would

be part of the murder trial. The rationale behind this is that because they could bring in

information not previously brought in with the case by the prosecutor or defense attorney. This

extraneous information may result in massive problems for the case at hand (Liska, 2017).

Confirmation Bias can be reduced by having the witnesses/experts try to act as guides for the

jurors. The testimony of experts is to reveal to the jury on how to solve the problem before them

in a trial. Experts are utilized to aid jurors to arrive at their decision and receive new insight into

a case. The expert’s main job is to allow jurors to participate in an internal conversation with

themselves and a conversation with other jurors on how they reached their conclusions. This will

allow for purposeful and unique decisions to come from the jurors.

To reduce the amount of selective thinking involved in criminal trials, lawyers must be

able to identify an efficient way to how and how much evidence or questions should be presented

to jurors. Typically a deliberate mind, such as jurors, seems to be influenced by the selectiveness

(Cooper, et, 2011). To prevent this bias from affecting the jurors’ minds, lawyers can give key

pieces of evidence and have supported that validate the bigger piece of evidence. Rather than

over stacking information with various amounts pieces of evidence, lawyers could focus on the

key ones. By doing that, jurors will be able to remember the key pieces of evidence shown by

both sides and make their own decision about the verdict of a defendant.
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 10

This last recommendation is an overall approach to reducing all types of biases, a

rationale for striking a juror. In the present day, voir dire allows lawyers to use a peremptory

challenge. This power allows lawyers to, “dismiss prospective jurors whom one party believes

will be biased and therefore unable to evaluate the case fairly” (“What does it mean to “strike” a

juror?”, 2018). Typically peremptory strikes allow lawyers to go around the rule of not being

allowed to kick jurors out due to their race, ethnicity or gender. However, peremptory strikes do

not require explanations for removing a jury. Using a rationale will hold discreet and private

information held between the lawyer (dismissing the juror) and the judge. Lawyers must provide

an explanation in the context of it must be that the jurors cannot associate with the defendant in

any way. With this option, if the judge disapproves of the strike, the potential juror will not

become a juror in the case. Likewise, if the judge approves of the strike, the juror will preside the

case. The rationale must be a connection to the defendant because attorneys are able to dodge

around “peremptory challenges” and strike a juror for just being a minority or women in society.

By indicating a sense of correlation between a juror and a defendant, will show telltale signs of

juror bias. However, if the criminal justice system is allowed to solely provide a rationale of

kicking a juror because “of a reasonable association” between the defendant and the juror then

the justice system will become less bad than it actually is. Unless any other rationale is provided

by either the prosecution or defense to remove the juror. If the judge does approve of the strike,

the potential juror is removed from the selection of jury pools and does not have to be part of

jury duty. Allowing for a reason to strike a juror, will allow a perspective from an authoritarian

figure, the judge, to see if the striking legitimately makes sense or it's just because of biases
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 11

(racial biases, gender biases, etc.). Having the judge approves of the strike or not will reduce the

chance of prosecutors/defense attorneys of getting their way in court.

Research Methods and Data Collection:

For this project, a quantitative research design was chosen. The motive behind this data

collection was to discover if there was a correlation between race and juror bias. This was chosen

because of how much information can be obtained by looking at both statistics and observation.

The method that was selected was causal-comparative research. By using causal-comparative

research, it will allow for a possible cause and effect relationship between race and juror bias.

Therefore, quantitative data can be used and be combined for the best conclusion, and the

discovery of the relationship between race and the verdict of a case. The tool used was a

meta-analysis. Using meta-analysis, allows a summary of all the various studies to come together

to make one grand conclusion. This type of data collection is useful because it allows us to see if

the relationship seen in one case study, is seen in another. Meta-analysis will help with bringing

in the ideas behind the relationship in all the case studies, and establish a new idea. Furthermore,

if the data collection consists of only looking at one case of one trial, the researcher will not

know whether or not the findings in this research is the overall conclusion. Using both statistics

and observations, allows much different analysis to occur. This data collection leads to a better

well-rounded evaluation of the connections between the race of the jury and the verdict of the

case

Data Collection:

The Source Results Factors: Correlations

THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 12

Sommers & Michael -Practicing attorneys, Age -They tend to take out
I. Norton & Sara law students and Marriage Status a black juror during
Brauner, 2007, college students in (Married or Not or Criminal Cases, So
Bias in Jury similar selections led divorced) that a criminal does
Selection: Justifying to eliminate a black Financial Status not come out scotch
Prohibited juror, when the free, because of how
Peremptory defendant is a black severe White Jurors
Challenges defendant are

THE IMPACT OF -Cases with no blacks Defendant’s Whites tend to be

JURY RACE IN in jury pool, black race of the Defendant harsher on conviction
CRIMINAL defendants are matters rates, especially ones
TRIALS, Shamena convicted at an 81% that have a black
Anwar, Patrick and 66% for white defendant
Bayer, Randi - One black, 71% for - Black Defendants
Hjalmarsson, 2012 black and 73% for are charged the most
white
-Black Potential
Jurors can affect trial
outcomes
-64% had a potential
black juror but only
28% of them actually
were able to get a seat
- Black Defendants
has less charges than
White Defendants
and they are still
found more guilty
than them

Barbara O’Brien & - Prosecutors were -MSU professors -Correlates back to

Catherine M. Grosso more than twice as focused on the trials first Case
2011. likely to strike where criminals were Can see that Whites
qualified blacks from sentenced to death are more harsher
serving on a jury as row. And look into when it comes to
members of other the race of the jury. Sentencing
races in North Blacks were Struck
Carolina harder than any other
- Revealed it would race, (60% strike rate)
be more likely that compared to the
you will be sentenced 55.6% of non-black).
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 13

to death if one of the This data is not

victims of the random, it's reliable.
criminal were white -​Correlates back to
-​ ​2.39 times more first source, where
likely that a black black jurors get struck
venire member gets more likely
struck compared to .
any other race.
Race was a
significant factor in
prosecutorial
decisions to exercise
peremptory
challenges in jury
selection
-They discover that
an overwhelming of
jurors were white
(81%)

Noye, Liptak, A -New study of Trials --Racial Composition -Shows the

Study of the Racially revealed that potential of the Juries appears Likelihood of Black
Disparate Use of jurors who were black to make the ult. Jurors being struck
Peremptory were more likely to Difference in the case Shows that most of
Challenges by the get struck down from -Age the time if the jury
Caddo Parish District juries, -Marriage or Not consists mostly of
Attorney’s office, prosecutors strike -Religious African Americans
August 2015 down black jurors -Financial Status they will most likely
46% of the time, but -Military in or not see the defendant is
only 15% of other Appearance. (These innocent.
juries are the type of - Whites are more
-No Defendants were reasons, Lawyers use severe on their
Acquitted when less when they strike a punishments than
than 2 Black Jurors black juror or any Blacks are, Whites
were part of the trial juror) think defendants are
-However 19% of the automatically guilty
Defendants were
acquitted when there
were more than 5
black jurors available.
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 14

*Venire: Panel of Prospective Jurors

Results And Data Analysis:

Through the process of this data collection, it can be concluded that race plays a factor in

juror bias,impact the decision of a trial and affects the selection of the jury pool. It is evident

that many prosecutors tend to remove African American jurors from cases. Statistically, it will

2.39 times more likely that a black venire member gets struck compared to any other race. Black

jurors are removed from court because they are less severe about the punishment of a defendant

compared to other races. Comparatively in Noye’s study it was found that no defendants were

acquitted when the jury had less than two African American jurors, but 19% of defendants were

acquitted when there were more than 5 African American jurors part of the jury. Therefore,

African Americans judge less severely when it comes to a case compared to white jurors.

Additionally, prosecutors most likely will remove African American jurors. This is because most

prosecutors believe that African American jurors are sympathetic to their own race. A significant

finding that was discovered was just how harsh prosecutors can be towards black jurors and that

most juries actually consistently filled with whites. In Michigan’s case study, the group of

researchers discovered that 81% of the jury seemed to be solely white. Additionally, another

significant lesson being taught is the fact that different races may have different perspectives on

ideas of society. Lawyers need to take this into account when deciding whether to strike a juror

or not. Throughout all the studies, there was one outlier discovered amongst the many case
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 15

studies. The outlier was that a study focused on both the race of the defendant and of the jury

pool. This had not been focused on in any other study. The final most crucial finding was that the

race of the defendant matters and has more of an impact on the decision of a case than the race of

the jury pool. It was found that when there were no black jurors in the pool, 81% of Black

defendants were convicted and 66% for white defendants. One complication that occurred during

the process of data collection was attempting to find studies that were similar to one another. The

conflict occurred because of the scarce amount of studies on juror bias, specifically the races of

the jury. Also, it was hard to find ones where it specifically talked about the removal of jurors in

a trial. Most case studies talked about the decisions jurors would make based on their race. This

data is trustworthy because these studies come from organizations and universities. The

researcher would have changed some of the process used in this data collection. One change the

researcher would make is attempting to find similar studies around the same year. By changing

the date of the cases studies will allow for more consistent results.

In conclusion, the data gathered shows that African Americans are most likely to be

removed from the jury. By discovering that the correlation between the number of African

American jurors and defendants being acquitted is due to the lower severity levels of black jurors

compared to other races. In comparison, the severity levels of African Americans compared to

whites is largely different, in which White is considered more severe on their decision. This

conclusion is supported by the percentage of defendants acquitted when there were more than 5

Black jurors in session. Therefore, this realization must come into society, and realize that by

only having one race, whites, decide all the decisions of court trials, increases juror bias. Having

only one race decide a case, does not bring in any new perspectives about ideas and morals.
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 16

These results are consistent with the information from the literature review. The conclusions can

connect back to jurors making premature judgments created by the irrationality of human

thought. These “premature judgments” can be seen when juries only consist of solely white

people, who are severe on their punishments and do not acquit many defendants. According to

one of the case studies, when the majority of the jury were white, no defendant was acquitted of

their crimes. This shows that white jurors have these premature judgments that the defendant is

already guilty and focus solely on that, rather than on the evidence proving his/her innocence.

Juror bias is everywhere, and can never go away. But with research into forms of juror bias, can

help create resolutions and attempt to reduce juror bias in any shape they can. Therefore every

trial conducted in court will indeed be a fair trial.

Conclusion:

In summation, reducing juror bias is vital to helping the United States’ justice system.

The essential goal of the criminal system is to established fair and impartial decisions in criminal

trials. Since the inception of the jury process, there have been several biases introduced that

society has decided to disregard as unimportant. Biases in the justice system have not been

addressed, which can establish a major dilemma in the future. Minorities being severely

underrepresented was proven via meta-analysis and takes note of the reasons why minorities are

taken out of consideration in the jury selection pool. To combat these issues, it is indisputably

necessary that the justice system requires a rationale by lawyers to explain why they strike

specific jurors. By providing an explanation, it allows minorities to be represented in criminal

trials. Furthermore, by implementing reduction methods it will allow for unprejudiced trials.
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 17

Thus, reducing biases within jurors will be the first steps for America to establish an excellent

justice system.
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 18

Works Cited:

Anwar, Shamena, Bayer, Patrick, Hjalmarsson, Randi. “The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal
Trials.” October 2011. repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1349
context=heinz works. Accessed 20 Mar. 2018.

Bray, Natasha. “The influence of gender and sexist attitudes on juror verdicts and perceptions of
domestic violence in heterosexual relationships.” ​University of Glamorgan, ​2011.
e-space.mmu.ac.uk/576720/1/Bray%20(Natasha)%202011%20(Glamorgan)%20
Quantitative.pdf Accessed 23 Mar. 2018

Bribriesco, Andrew W. "Latino/a plaintiffs and the intersection of stereotypes, unconscious bias,
race-neutral policies, and personal injury." ​Journal of Gender, Race and Justice​, Winter
2010, p. 373+. ​Opposing Viewpoints In Context​,
ink.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A227073457/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=dfb9369d.
Accessed 19 Mar. 2018.

Clemons, J. T. (2014, Summer). Blind injustice: the Supreme Court, implicit racial bias, and the
racial disparity in the criminal justice system. ​American Criminal Law Review​, ​51​(3),
689+. Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A375696910/GPS?u=glen
20233 sid=GPS xid=3e01db0e. Accessed 20 Mar. 2018.

Cooper, Daniel, Brown, Loren, Campbell, Christopher, Cortes, Edwin. “The Myth of Juror
Impartiality: Strategies for Minimizing Juror Bias.” 2011.
www.litstrat.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/pdf13.pdf. Accessed 22 Mar. 2018

Cohen, Bob, Rosales, Janet. “Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Manhattan Jury Pools. Results of a
Survey and Suggestions for Reform.” June 2007.
ppefny.org/2007/06/racial-and-ethnic-disparity-in-manhattan-jury-pools-results-of-a-surv
ey-and-suggestions-for-reform/474. Accessed 25 Mar 2018.

Foote, Donna, and Larry Reibstein. "The jury puzzle." ​Newsweek​, 30 Sept. 1996, p. 64+.
Professional Collection​,
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A18703474/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=98a5
61d3. Accessed 19 Mar. 2018.

Frederick, Jeffery​, ​“Tips for Understanding And Identifying Juror Bias.”1995.

www.nlrg.com/hs-fs/hub/79400/file-15663482-pdf/docs/tips_for_understanding_and_ide
ntifying_juror_bias_.pdf/documents_attorney_writing_samples/tips_for_understanding_a
nd_identifying_juror_bias_.pdf Accessed 19 March 2018.

Hightower, Susan. "Sex and the peremptory strike: an empirical analysis." ​Stanford Law Review​,
Apr. 2000, p. 895. ​Student Resources In Context​,
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 19

link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A61938731/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=236bcc5d.
Accessed 19 Mar. 2018.

Greeley, Ann. “ Gender and Racial Bias in the Courtroom.” ​DecisionQuest, ​2012.
pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5a27/5de67eeb74f8c872da6e544c9c86e38c3627.pdf Accessed
23 Mar.2018

Greene, E., & Bornstein, B. H. (2013, Fall). Nudging the justice system toward better decisions.
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology​, ​103​(4), 1155+. Retrieved from
link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A353320218/GPS?u=glen 20233 sid=GPS xid=1915e0be​.
Accessed 21 Mar. 2018.

Liska, Kristin A. "Experts in the jury room: when personal experience is extraneous
information." ​Stanford Law Review​, Mar. 2017, p. 911+. ​Student Resources In Context​,
link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A491843136/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=9505efae.
Accessed 20 Mar. 2018.

Mckneely, Mike. “How Juror Bias can affect Criminal Trials.” July 10, 2017.
www.fresnocriminalattorney.com/juror-bias-can-affect-criminal-trials/ Accessed 19, Mar.
2018.

Nugent, Donald. “Judicial Bias.” ​Cleveland State University.

engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&
httpsredir=1&article=1694&context=clevstlrev. Accessed 20 Mar. 2018.

O'Brien, Barbara, et al. "EXAMINING JURORS: APPLYING CONVERSATION ANALYSIS

TO VOIR DIRE IN CAPITAL CASES, A FIRST LOOK." ​Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology​, Fall 2017, p. 687+. ​Student Resources In Context​,
link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A515383465/GPS?u=glen 20233 sid=GPS xid=331458d.
Accessed 19 Mar. 2018

O’Brien, Sean, and Wayland Kathleen. “Implicit Bias and Capital Decision Making: Using
Narrative to Counter Prejudicial Psychiatric Labels.” 2015.
scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2812 context=hlr
Accessed 19 Mar. 2018.

“Use of Gender in Jury Selection.” ​McCarthy Wilson A Limited Liability Partnership,

www.mcwilson.com/Gender-in-Jury-Selection.aspx Accessed 18 March 2018.

​"Outing bail; Criminal-justice reform." ​The Economist​, 25 Nov. 2017, p. 29(US). ​Student
Resources In Context​,
THE ONE DECISION:THE IMPACT OF JUROR BIAS IN A TRIAL ​Patel 20

link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A515424860/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=c1fdfea9.
Accessed 18 Mar. 2018.

“What does it mean to strike a juror?” ​Rottenstein Law Group, 2018.

http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-does-it-mean-to-strike-a-juror/
Accessed 18 March 2018.