LASO 204 Final Q3

• Austin - Intro

  • Focuses on subtle biases and power dynamics are created by the physical layout and organization of a space
  • A courtrooms arrangement often acts against the defendant, as they're prepositioned as guilty or inferior
• Austin 1.1

  • The way the courtroom is structured and its participants are arranged create a sense of hierarchy or pecking order of status
  • Reinforces a sense of inferiority of the defendant and their lawyers and thus a sense of dominance for prosecutors
  • Prosecutors are at the centre of all participants, while defence council is at the edge
  • This arrangement may communicate to participants that prosecutors are more important or legitimate being in the middle, while the defence's opinion should be "pushed to the side" as they are physically
• Austin 1.2

  • Flow of information predominantly moves towards the jury
  • Because the prosecution is physically closer to the jury, they may be perceived as a primary source of evidence and narrative
  • Being at the centre, they're the focal point of the trial and their arguments are seen with a heightened visibility and attention
  • In this sense, the defence is at a disadvantage, having to put more effort to be seen and noticed
• Austin 1.3

  • Identifies the notion of the "home court advantage" where the prosecution benefits from a sense of familiarity with the courtroom environment
  • Prosecutors often work within a specific court or district, creating relationships with judges, court staff and procedures of a particular court
  • This creates a sense of comfort and ease prosecutor
  • Prosecution may seem more confident and assertive in their interactions, while defense may struggle to navigate the environment, harming their perceived credibility
• Austin 1.4

  • Highlights how subtle cues, such as non verbal communication and physical appearance can create bias against the defence
  • Despite being legally innocent till proven guilty, the way defendants are presented often forms a guilty image
  • Perhaps they're in prison uniform or handcuffed already, maybe they couldn't properly shower or fix their appearance
  • In this case, the way the defendant is presented in a way that makes them seem inferior or improper, creating an image of guilty
• Austin - Conclusion

  • While theoretically and legally, both the defence and the prosecution have equality, in practice and reality, because of the courtrooms arrangements, they don't
  • Following his writing, we should
  • reevaluate the design of our courtrooms to promote more equitable distribution of space and visibility
  • ensure equal opportunity for both sides to present their cases effectively
•  O’Barr, & Conley Riner - introduction

  • Emphasizes the inherent bias in courtroom processes, particularly in rape trials
•  O’Barr, & Conley Riner - 1.1

  • There is a parallel drawn between the domination experienced by rape victims and the power dynamics within the courtroom interactions
  • When a survivor recounts their experiences of being physically dominated and violated, often times defence lawyers will continue this dismissal of the victim
  • They're forced to not only retell but in a sense, relive the feeling of being powerless and perhaps presenting as such
  • Disadvantages the victim by creating a power imbalance and diminishing their credibility
• O’Barr, & Conley Riner - 1.2

  • Often defence lawyers will focus on the victim's state of mind
  • Highlights the sexual "double bind", in which no matter how the victim feels, they're a negative connotation
  • Too emotional—flighty, irrational woman stereotype. Not credible, maybe vengeful
  • Too calm, in control—not believable that she would allow herself to be dominated (maybe also a gold-digger?)
• O’Barr, & Conley Riner - 1.3

  • Highlights how skillful layers may make attempts to comment on victim's sexual history, even if asking about is explicitly is illegal
  • In this sense, exploiting loopholes and strategic questions may reinforce power imbalances, hurting the survivor's credibility
• O’Barr, & Conley Riner - conclusion

  • The processes of cases often causes a power imbalance, specifically in rape trials, as they are re-victimized and often succumb to stereotypes
  • Lawyers should avoid using practices that re-victimize the victims, allowing their credibility to uphold equally
  • Moreover, there should be stricter enforcement of rape shield laws, to prevent the exploitation of loop holes
  • Oppresses women
• Gau introduction

  • Focuses on the operation of subtle bias through the racial composition of juries
  • Despite efforts to ensure equality, minorities remain underrepresented in jury selection processes
  • Troubling tendency toward predominantly white juries, pointing to systemic biases within the selection processes and venire select phase
  • Venire: the pool of potential jurors from which a jury panel is selected
  • Juries continue to be unproportional to the broader population
• Gau 1.1

  • Highlights how there's critical importance in the diversity within a jury's composition
  • Mixed-race juries are widely perceived as more legitimate and fair, particularly in cases of minority defendant
  • Absence of minority perspectives has been linked to harsher judgements, particularly towards Black and Latino communities
• Gau 1.2

  • Emphasizes a distinction between token jurors and those who have material impact
  • Token jurors are those who are part of the jury solely for the sake of appearance
  • Their perspective doesn't have any pressing impression on the decision
  • There is a need for material jurors who's perspective has a genuine influence on the decision of other jurors
• Gau 1.3

  • The ongoing discrepancies between the jury panel and the population highlights biases in how the venire is created that is beyond driver's license or voter lists
  • There must be another way to expand our database to make it more comprehensive and representative
  • Moreover, steps should be taken to alleviate the potential financial burden of attending juror duty
  • such as encouraging employers to provide full wages during service
  • Having accessible ESL classes can facilitate the participation of non-english speaking minorities, diversifying juries
  • Oppresses minorities