About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

90 Judicature 152 (2006-2007)
Can Jury Trial Innovations Improve Juror Understanding of DNA Evidence

handle is hein.journals/judica90 and id is 152 raw text is: CAN JURY TRIAL INNOVATIONS IMPROVE JUROR UNDERSTANDING OF DNA EVIDENCE? by B. MICHAEL DANN, VALERIE P. HANS, and DAVID H. KAYE A single spot of blood on a pink windowsill will tell investigators who broke a windowpane, turned a lock, and kidnapped 2-year-old Molly Evans from her bedroom in the middle of the night. An expert Innovations su witness will testify that the DNA and juror nc profile of the blood evidence recovered from the windowsill was the potential to entered into CODIS, an elec- comprehensio tronic database of DNA profiles.' That process yielded a hit, iden- other scient tifying the defendant as the most likely source of the blood inside Molly's room. But will jurors be able to understand the expert's intri- cate analysis and use it to reach a verdict? And what-if any-steps can be taken to increase jurors' comprehen- sion of complex DNA evidence? Questions such as these prompted an NIJ-funded study on the impact ofjury trial innovations upon mock jurors' understanding of contested mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence. (See How mitochondrial DNA compares to nuclear DNA, page 153.) By examining how jurors in dif- ferent experimental conditions performed on a Juror Comprehension Scale both before and after deliberations, researchers were able to assess whether four specific inno- vations improved jurors' understanding of this complex evidence and identify which innovations worked best. Innovations tested The four innovations used in the experiment were: *juror note taking. Mock jurors were given a steno pad and pen for note taking and were told that their notes would be available to them during deliberations. * Questions by jurors. Mock jurors could submit ques- tions to the presiding judge, who obtained answers from an offsite DNA expert. * Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) checklists. This innova- tion guided jurors through complex mtDNA evidence by asking them a series of questions. (See mtDNA evidence checklist, page 154.) - Multipurpose juror notebooks. Mock jurors were given notebooks containing paper, copies of the two experts' slides, the mtDNA checklist, a glossary of DNA terms used in the case, and a witness list. )t F1 ii Selecting the mock jury Jurors were selected from jury-eligible adults called to jury duty in the Superior Court of New Castle County, Delaware. Jurors were randomly h as checklists assigned to 60 eight-person .ebooks have juries. Each juror filled out an initial questionnaire that queried improve jurors' his or her views on the reliability of mtDNA and of certain types of scientific testi- mony and about science in gen- ic evidence. eral. (See Mock jurors' attitudes about science and DNA, page 156.) Researchers then assigned each jury one of the following conditions:2 Condition 1 No innovations (control) Condition 2 Note taking Condition 3 Question asking and note taking Condition 4 DNA checklist and note taking Condition 5 Juror notebook and note taking Condition 6 All innovations (note taking, question asking, DNA checklist, and juror notebook) University of Delaware doctoral candidates Stephanie Albertson and Erin Farley assisted with the research project. This article first appeared in the NIJJournal; it is used here with the per- mission of the National Institute of Justice, the research, development and evaluation arm of the U.S. Department ofJustice. For more on NIJ's work in the application of DNA analysis to criminal justice, visit www.dna.gov. 1. The Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) is an electronic database of DNA profiles administered through the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The system lets federal, state, and local crime labs share and compare DNA pro- files. Through CODIS, investigators match DNA from crime scenes with con- victed offenders and with other crime scenes using computer software, just as fingerprints are matched through automated fingerprint identification systems. CODIS primarily uses two indexes: (1) the Convicted Offender Index, which contains profiles of convicted offenders, and (2) the Forensic Index, which contains profiles from crime scene evidence. The strength of CODIS lies in solving cases that have no suspects. If DNA evidence entered into CODIS matches someone in the offender index, a warrant can be obtained authorizing the collection of a sample from that offender to con- firm the match. If the offender's DNA is in the Forensic Index, the system allows investigators-even in different jurisdictions-to exchange informa- tion about their respective cases. 152 JUDICATURE Volume 90, Number 4 January-February 2007

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most