There are two items in this month’s Journal of Law and Human Behavior with value and relevance to trial practice:  an item on interviewing, and an item on how juries make decisions.  Here are the titles, more later.

Divine, Buddenheim, Houp, Studebaker, and Stolle, Strength of Evidence, Evidentiary Influences, and the Liberation Hypothesis, Data from the Field, 33(2) J. Law & Human Behavior, 136 (2009).  Easy cases are easy, but what influences a jury to decide in cases where the evidence is not clear and overwhelming – close cases?

Vrij, Leal, Granhag, Mann, Fisher, Hillman, and Sperry, Outsmarting Liars: The Benefit of Asking Unexpected Questions, 33(2) J. Law & Human Behavior, 159 (2009).  Liars prepare to be questioned and they anticipate questions.  So what happens when you ask a question they haven’t expected, anticipated, and thus prepared for.

Posted in:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *