The Role of Questions Trails in Assisting Juror Comprehension

Professor Jonathan Clough10th Annual Jury Research and Practice ConferenceAustralian National University8 February 2013

The ‘Supreme Test’

The ‘supreme test’ of a charge to the jury is that it should be ‘comprehensible to an ordinary member of the public who is called to sit on a jury and who has no particular acquaintance with the law.’

-per Lord Mackay

8 February 201310th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 2

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 3

What do jurors comprehend?

Research has consistently found that jurors struggle to comprehend jury directions.

– A 1999 New Zealand study found that while 85% of the jurors interviewed found the jury charge ‘clear’, and more than 80% found it ‘helpful’, in 73% of the cases studied at least some jurors displayed a misunderstanding of the law.

– A 2010 UK study of 797 jurors found only 31% fully understood the directions (improving to 48% when provided with written directions).

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 4

What do jurors comprehend?

A 2008 study of 1,225 jurors for the NSW BOCSAR found that jurors understood ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ to mean:

– Sure the person is guilty (55.4%)– Almost sure the person is guilty (22.9%)– Very likely the person is guilty (11.6%)– Pretty likely the person is guilty (10.1%)

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 5

Acknowledging the Problem

‘Often, as a trial judge, I experienced concern about the capacity of jury members to follow and comply with the plethora of sometimes complicated instructions that I was obliged to give them.... It is not simply a question of the protraction of an already complex and costly process that is involved, but much more importantly the reliability of the jury verdict and the respect with which it is regarded in the community.’

– R v Yasso per Vincent JA

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 6

Challenges to Comprehension

‘We seem to have hit upon a system designed to ensure, in any but the simplest cases, that the path we require [the jury] to follow should be as obscure, as tortuous and as arduous as could possibly be devised.’

– Moses LJ

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 7

Challenges to Comprehension

The experience of being a juror presents a number of challenges to comprehension:

Cognitive complexity Organisation and Presentation of Information Verbal Instructions Sustaining Concentration Pre-existing beliefs Anxiety

8 February 2013

8

Challenges to Comprehension

There are a number of dimensions to ‘understanding’ including:

Recall

Comprehension

Application

8 February 201310th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 9

Recommendations for Change

A number of reforms can assist juror comprehension:

– Narrowing the issues in dispute– Preliminary directions on law and in-running– Note taking/access to transcript– Ability to ask questions– Length and complexity of jury directions– Provision of written materials

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 10

Question Trails

It may be that there is only so much that can be done to improve juror comprehension within the traditional framework of requiring jurors to apply the law to the facts.

The ‘fact-based’ or ‘question trail’ approach asks jurors a series of factual questions, placed in logical order and with accompanying evidentiary directions.

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 11

Question Trails

‘The Route to Verdict is a sequence of questions posed in a logical and necessary sequence. The jury should approach each question in turn as directed. They should reach a decision on the first question before they turn to the next, and so on. If they do, they will have addressed all the elements of the offence and the defence raised necessary to reach their verdict.’

– UK Crown Court Bench Book

8 February 2013

12

Question Trail*

8 February 2013*VLRC, Jury Directions Final Report 2009

13

‘Route to Verdict’*

8 February 2013* UK Crown Court Bench Book 2010

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 14

Question Trails

The idea of providing jurors with written factual questions is not new (Auld Review, 2001)

Related terms include ‘flow charts’, ‘decision-trees’, ‘jury checklists’, ‘fact-based directions’ and ‘route to verdict’.

Question trails are now:– routinely utilised in NZ (R v Dixon [2007] NZCA 398)– increasingly in the UK (King v R [2012] EWCA Crim

805)– proposed in the Jury Directions Bill 2012 (Vic)

(‘integrated directions’).8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 15

Question Trails

Key features:– Written– Logically structured– Questions are phrased so as to require jurors to

answer factual questions; the law is ‘embedded’.– Facilitates integration of legal definitions/directions– There is no one ‘correct’ approach

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 16

Question Trails

It is hypothesised that this fact-based approach plays to the jury’s strength; that is, on their ability to follow factual evidence and to make judgements about those facts.

By focusing on factual questions, it largely obviates the need for jurors to recall and understand the legal elements of the case.

There has been relatively little research on the effectiveness of Question Trails.

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 17

Asking the Right Questions

Clough, Ogloff and Monteleone, together with the Victorian Department of Justice, have been awarded ARC Linkage funding to conduct empirical research into methods of improving juror comprehension.

The research will evaluate standard, modified and question trail directions in two studies.

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 18

Simulated Study

80 mock juries will be used to evaluate four different conditions:

– Standard– Modified– Modified with checklist– Modified with question trail

Jury comprehension will be tested individually and as a group.

Deliberations will be video-taped.

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 19

Field Study

50-60 trials in Victoria adopting traditional methods will be analysed and compared with trials in NZ adopting the Question Trail approach.

– Trials will be analysed in terms of communication practices, material provided, length of deliberations, questions asked.

– Judges will be interviewed to gain an understanding of judicial practice and views relating to juror comprehension.

– Jurors will be interviewed post-verdict to gain an understanding of subjective and objective assessments of comprehension.

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 20

The Bigger Picture

Even if they improve comprehension, question trails cannot, of themselves, address all of the challenges to juror comprehension.

They should be seen in the context of reform of the trial process more broadly; e.g. Jury Directions Bill 2012 (Vic).

8 February 2013

10th Annual Jury Research and Practice Conference 21

Questions?

8 February 2013