CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Sunday, October 22, 2006

CrimProfs James Jacobs and Michael Cahill Speak About the Finality of Jury Deliberations

Jacobs_1From newsday.com: New York University School of Law CrimProf James Jacobs and Brooklyn Law School CrimProf Michael Cahill both recently discussed the problems with former Jury Foreman Loy Malcomb's complaint that she was pressured into agreeing on a guilty verdict in Martin Heidgen murder trial.

"When it's over, it's over, and we don't almost ever allow people to impeach their own verdicts," said CrimProf Jacobs. "If she had all those doubts she should have Mcahillsmall held on to her position."

CrimProf Cahill said recent state appellate decisions have found that the "tenor" of deliberations is not something that can be used to impeach a jury verdict. In one case, for example, several jurors were found to have threatened one of their peers into agreeing with them, and the appellate division still let the verdict stand, Cahill said.

"They're entitled to reach the conclusion they reached, and there's very little scrutiny of the process they used," Cahill said. Rest of Article. . . [Mark Godsey]

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2006/10/crimprofs_james.html

CrimProfs | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d83536637153ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference CrimProfs James Jacobs and Michael Cahill Speak About the Finality of Jury Deliberations:

Comments

Post a comment