Search results for 'jury' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Ben Jury (Oklahoma State University)
Profile: David Jury
  1. Gordon Sinclair Jury (1937). Value and Ethical Objectivity: A Study in Ethical Objectivity and the Objectivity of Value. London, G. Allen & Unwin, Ltd..score: 30.0
    November 1936 PREFACE THIS book is, in slightly revised form, a dis sertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Yale University.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Annabelle Lever (2009). Racial Profiling and Jury Trials. The Jury Expert 21 (1):20-35.score: 27.0
    How, if at all, should race figure in criminal trials with a jury? How far should attorneys be allowed or encouraged to probe the racial sensitivities of jurors and what does this mean for the appropriate way to present cases which involve racial profiling and, therefore, are likely to pit the words and actions of a white policeman against those of a young black man?
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Christian List & Robert E. Goodin (2001). Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem. Journal of Political Philosophy 9 (3):277–306.score: 24.0
    This paper generalises the classical Condorcet jury theorem from majority voting over two options to plurality voting over multiple options. The paper further discusses the debate between epistemic and procedural democracy and situates its formal results in that debate. The paper finally compares a number of different social choice procedures for many-option choices in terms of their epistemic merits. An appendix explores the implications of some of the present mathematical results for the question of how probable majority cycles (as (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Thom Brooks (2004). A Defence of Jury Nullification. Res Publica 10 (4):401-423.score: 24.0
    In both Great Britain and the United States there has been a growing debate about the modern acceptability of jury nullification. Properly understood, juries do not have any constitutional right to ignore the law, but they do have the power to do so nevertheless. Juries that nullify may be motivated by a variety of concerns: too harsh sentences, improper government action, racism, etc. In this article, I shall attempt to defend jury nullification on a number of grounds. First, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Jason Brennan (forthcoming). Condorcet's Jury Theorem and the Optimum Number of Voters. POLITICS.score: 24.0
    Many political theorists and philosophers use Condorcet's Jury Theorem to defend democracy. This paper illustrates an uncomfortable implication of Condorcet's Jury Theorem. Realistically, when the conditions of Condorcet’s Jury Theorem hold, even in very high stakes elections, having more than 100,000 citizens vote does no significant good in securing good political outcomes. On the Condorcet model, unless voters enjoy voting, or unless they produce some other value by voting, then the cost to most voters of voting exceeds (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Thom Brooks (2004). The Right to Trial by Jury. Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):197–212.score: 24.0
    This article offers a justification for the continued use of jury trials. I shall critically examine the ability of juries to render just verdicts, judicial impartiality, and judicial transparency. My contention is that the judicial system that best satisfies these values is most preferable. Of course, these three values are not the only factors relevant for consideration. Empirical evidence demonstrates that juries foster both democratic participation and public legitimation of legal decisions regarding the most serious cases. Nevertheless, juries are (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Ruth Ben-Yashar (forthcoming). The Generalized Homogeneity Assumption and the Condorcet Jury Theorem. Theory and Decision:1-5.score: 24.0
    The Condorcet jury theorem (CJT) is based on the assumption of homogeneous voters who imperfectly know the correct policy. We reassess the validity of the CJT when voters are homogeneous and each knows the correct decision with an average probability of more than a half.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Thomas A. Green (2013). The Jury and Criminal Responsibility in Anglo-American History. Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-20.score: 24.0
    Anglo-American theories of criminal responsibility require scholars to grapple with, inter alia, the relationship between the formal rule of law and the powers of the lay jury as well as two inherent ideas of freedom: freedom of the will and political liberty. Here, by way of canvassing my past work and prefiguring future work, I sketch some elements of the history of the Anglo-American jury and offer some glimpses of commentary on the interplay between the jury—particularly its (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Serguei Kaniovski (2010). Aggregation of Correlated Votes and Condorcet's Jury Theorem. Theory and Decision 69 (3):453-468.score: 24.0
    This paper proves two theorems for homogeneous juries that arise from different solutions to the problem of aggregation of dichotomous choice. In the first theorem, negative correlation increases the competence of the jury, while positive correlation has the opposite effect. An enlargement of the jury with positive correlation can be detrimental up to a certain size, beyond which it becomes beneficial. The second theorem finds a family of distributions for which correlation has no effect on a jury’s (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Serguei Kaniovski & Alexander Zaigraev (2011). Optimal Jury Design for Homogeneous Juries with Correlated Votes. Theory and Decision 71 (4):439-459.score: 24.0
    In a homogeneous jury, in which each vote is correct with the same probability, and each pair of votes correlates with the same correlation coefficient, there exists a correlation-robust voting quota, such that the probability of a correct verdict is independent of the correlation coefficient. For positive correlation, an increase in the correlation coefficient decreases the probability of a correct verdict for any voting rule below the correlation-robust quota, and increases that probability for any above the correlation-robust quota. The (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. David M. Estlund (1994). Opinion Leaders, Independence, and Condorcet's Jury Theorem. Theory and Decision 36 (2):131-162.score: 21.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Franz Dietrich (2008). The Premises of Condorcet's Jury Theorem Are Not Simultaneously Justified. Episteme 5 (1):56-73.score: 18.0
    Condorcet's famous jury theorem reaches an optimistic conclusion on the correctness of majority decisions, based on two controversial premises about voters: they are competent and vote independently, in a technical sense. I carefully analyse these premises and show that: (i) whether a premise is justified depends on the notion of probability considered and (ii) none of the notions renders both premises simultaneously justified. Under the perhaps most interesting notions, the independence assumption should be weakened.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Jan-Willem Romeijn & David Atkinson (2011). Learning Juror Competence: A Generalized Condorcet Jury Theorem. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (3):237-262.score: 18.0
    This article presents a generalization of the Condorcet Jury Theorem. All results to date assume a fixed value for the competence of jurors, or alternatively, a fixed probability distribution over the possible competences of jurors. In this article, we develop the idea that we can learn the competence of the jurors by the jury vote. We assume a uniform prior probability assignment over the competence parameter, and we adapt this assignment in the light of the jury vote. (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Franz Dietrich & Christian List (2004). A Model of Jury Decisions Where All Jurors Have the Same Evidence. Synthese 142 (2):175 - 202.score: 18.0
    Under the independence and competence assumptions of Condorcet’s classical jury model, the probability of a correct majority decision converges to certainty as the jury size increases, a seemingly unrealistic result. Using Bayesian networks, we argue that the model’s independence assumption requires that the state of the world (guilty or not guilty) is the latest common cause of all jurors’ votes. But often – arguably in all courtroom cases and in many expert panels – the latest such common cause (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Paul Robertshaw (2000). The Jury Between the Civil and the Criminal Law. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 13 (3):251-278.score: 18.0
    This article comprises two case studies of a ``problem'' within the Anglo-Welsh legal process of jury trial. In that tradition, the judge not only instructs on the law to be applied by the jury, s/he also ``summarises'' the evidence after counsel have already done so. This summarising is largely unconstrained by appellate control. The ``problem'' that the two cases present is that they were trials of ``civil'' issues in which the subject matter is also categorised as ``criminal''. Where (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Christian List, Some Remarks on the Probability of Cycles - Appendix 3 to 'Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem'.score: 18.0
    This item was published as 'Appendix 3: An Implication of the k-option Condorcet jury mechanism for the probability of cycles' in List and Goodin (2001) http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/705/. Standard results suggest that the probability of cycles should increase as the number of options increases and also as the number of individuals increases. These results are, however, premised on a so-called "impartial culture" assumption: any logically possible preference ordering is assumed to be as likely to be held by an individual as any (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Douglas W. Maynard & John F. Manzo (1993). On the Sociology of Justice: Theoretical Notes From an Actual Jury Deliberation. Sociological Theory 11 (2):171-193.score: 18.0
    Despite the venerable place that "justice" occupies in social scientific theory and research, little effort has been made to see how members of society themselves define and use the concept when confronted with determining "what has happened" in some social arena, theorizing about why it happened, and deciding what should ensue. We take an ethnomethodological approach to justice, attempting to recover it as a feature of practical activity or a "phenomenon of order." Our analysis involves an actual videotaped jury (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Lucinda Vandervort (2005). The Defence of Belief in Consent: Guidelines and Jury Instructions for Application of Criminal Code Section 265(4). Criminal Law Quarterly 50 (4):441-452.score: 18.0
    The availability of the defence of belief in consent under section 265(4) is a question of law, subject to review on appeal. The statutory provision is based on the common law rule that applies to all defences. Consideration of the defence when it is unavailable in law and failure to consider it when it is available are both incorrect. A judge is most likely to avoid error when ruling on availability of the defence if the ruling: (1) is grounded on (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Franz Dietrich & Kai Spiekermann (2013). Independent Opinions? On the Causal Foundations of Belief Formation and Jury Theorems. Mind 122 (487):fzt074.score: 18.0
    It is often claimed that opinions are more likely to be correct if they are held independently by many individuals. But what does it mean to hold independent opinions? To clarify this condition, we distinguish four notions of probabilistic opinion independence. Which notion applies depends on environmental factors such as commonly perceived evidence. More formally, it depends on the causal network that determines how people interact and form their opinions. In a general theorem, we identify conditions on this network that (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Albert W. Dzur (2010). Democracy's "Free School": Tocqueville and Lieber on the Value of the Jury. Political Theory 38 (5):603 - 630.score: 18.0
    This essay discusses the jury's value in American democracy by examining Alexis de Tocqueville's analysis of the jury as a free school for the public. His account of jury socialization, which stressed lay deference to judges and trust in professional knowledge, was one side of a complex set of ideas about trust and authority in American political thought. Tocqueville's contemporary Francis Lieber held juries to have important competencies and to be ambivalent rather than deferential regarding court professionals. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Marco Goldoni (2012). At the Origins of Constitutional Review: Sieyès' Constitutional Jury and the Taming of Constituent Power. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 32 (2):211-234.score: 18.0
    Even though he is mainly known for his concept of constituent power, Sieyès was one of the first constitutional theorists to ask for a guardian of the constitution which closely resembles contemporary constitutional courts. This article reconstructs the main tenets of his proposal, puts them in the larger context of his constitutional theory and then assesses the constitutional nature and functions of this institution. The judgment is mixed: as an organ, Sieyès’ constitutional jury is a hybrid institution, neither a (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Jason Wyckoff (2011). Rousseau's General Will and the Condorcet Jury Theorem. History of Political Thought 32 (1):49-62.score: 18.0
    In The Social Contract, Rousseau asserts his infallibility thesis: that the general will can never err, and that one's position in the minority indicates that what one took the general will to be was not actually so. Several theorists have argued that the Condorcet Jury Theorem, which states that in a sufficiently large group the majority opinion on a yes/no question is highly likely to be correct, provides a way to interpret and justify Rousseau's bold claim. I argue that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Brenner M. Fissell (2013). Jury Nullification and the Rule of Law. Legal Theory 19 (3):217-241.score: 18.0
    Despite an intractable judiciary, there is widespread consensus within the legal academy that jury nullification is compatible with the rule of law. This proposition is most strongly tested by where a jury nullifies simply because it disagrees with the law itself. While some substantive nullifications can comport with the rule of law, most commentatorsjustice,vely undifferentiated view of a morality (even though jurisdictional and vicinage morality can diverge). In doing so, a healthy vision of antityrannical nullifications is presented, but (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Robert A. Sedler, The Michigan Supreme Court Diminishes the Right to Trial by Jury in Civil Cases.score: 18.0
    In this paper, I have analyzed the right to trial by jury in civil cases as reflected in decisions of the Michigan Supreme Court over approximately a 20 year period dealing with three areas affecting the right to trial by jury in civil cases: (1) entitlement to a jury trial; (2) summary disposition; and (3) directed verdicts. The study was constructed to cover cases over a substantial period of time, so that it would be possible to analyze (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Albert W. Dzur (2012). Punishment, Participatory Democracy, and the Jury. Oup Usa.score: 18.0
    Focusing democratic theory on the pressing issue of punishment, Punishment, Participatory Democracy, and the Jury argues for participatory institutional designs as antidotes to the American penal state. Citizen action in institutions like the jury and restorative justice programs can foster the attunement, reflectiveness, and full-bodied communication needed as foundations for widespread civic responsibility for criminal justice.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. J. Forsemalm (2014). Consolidated Youth Jury: Alcohol Prevention for Young People From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. A Swedish Case Report. Public Health Ethics 7 (1):17-20.score: 18.0
    In the course of a project on European policy on media and alcohol, a series of structured deliberative discussion sessions with young people (aged 13–25 years) in Sweden were arranged, where young people could communicate and exchange ideas about risks and policy issues connected to alcohol consumption and drinking, as presented in fictional media. The objective was to understand how risks and knowledge about alcohol consumption is acquired by young people and ‘uploaded’ to peers. The discussion sessions applied adapted variants (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Alexander Zaigraev & Serguei Kaniovski (2012). Bounds on the Competence of a Homogeneous Jury. Theory and Decision 72 (1):89-112.score: 18.0
    In a homogeneous jury, the votes are exchangeable correlated Bernoulli random variables. We derive the bounds on a homogeneous jury’s competence as the minimum and maximum probability of the jury being correct, which arise due to unknown correlations among the votes. The lower bound delineates the downside risk associated with entrusting decisions to the jury. In large and not-too-competent juries the lower bound may fall below the success probability of a fair coin flip—one half, while the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. M. F. Burnyeat & Jonathan Barnes (1980). Socrates and the Jury: Paradoxes in Plato's Distinction Between Knowledge and True Belief. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 54:173 - 206.score: 15.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Jeffrey Abramson (1993). The Jury and Democratic Theory. Journal of Political Philosophy 1 (1):45-68.score: 15.0
  30. Albert W. Dzur (2011). “Why American Democracy Needs the Jury Trial”. Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):87-92.score: 15.0
  31. Atkinson, D. & Romeijn, J.-W., A Condorcet Jury Theorem for Unknown Juror Competence.score: 15.0
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Robert P. Burns (2011). Why America Still Needs the Jury Trial: A Friendly Response to Professor Dzur. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):93-95.score: 15.0
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. James P. Levine (1997). Review Essay/Jury Wisdom. Criminal Justice Ethics 16 (1):49-56.score: 15.0
    Norman J. Finkel, Commonsense Justice: Jurors? Notions of the Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995, 390pp.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. M. B. E. Smith (2005). Commentary: How Much Should Lawyers Know When Picking a Jury? Criminal Justice Ethics 24 (2):2-54.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Peter Milward (2013). Thomas More's Trial by Jury. Edited by Henry Ansgar Kelly , Louis W. Karlin & Gerard B. Wegemer . Pp. Xix, 240, Woodbridge, Suffolk, The Boydell Press, 2011, £55.00. [REVIEW] Heythrop Journal 54 (3):484-484.score: 15.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. P. Anand Rao (1999). Keeping the Science Court Out of the Jurybox: Helping the Jury Manage Scientific Evidence. Social Epistemology 13 (2):129 – 145.score: 15.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Robin Waterfield (1997). A.L. Bonnette (Tr.): Xenophon: Memorabilia. Translated and Annotated with an Introduction by C. Bruell. Pp. Xxviii + 171. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1994.R. C. Bartlett (Ed.): Xenophon: The Shorter Socratic Writings: Apology of Socrates to the Jury, Oeconomicus, and Symposium. Translations, with Interpretive Essays and Notes. Pp. X + 201. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1996. Cased. £23.50. ISBN: 0-8014-3214-6. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 47 (02):416-417.score: 15.0
  38. J. K. Anderson (1969). Anna S. Benjamin: Xenophon: Recollections of Socrates and Socrates' Defense Before the Jury. Pp. Xxv+157. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1965. Paper. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 19 (01):102-103.score: 15.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Roberto Gargarella (2013). Punishment, Deliberative Democracy & The Jury. Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-9.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Travis Hreno (2008). The Jury Nullification Instruction and the De Jure/De Facto Debate: A Hohfeldian Analysis. Public Affairs Quarterly 22 (3):231-251.score: 15.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Matthew Morton (2000). Product Liability: Florida Jury Finds That Cigarettes Caused Smoker's Disease. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (2):197-197.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. James S. Stramel (1989). A New Verdict on the 'Jury Passage': Theaetetus 201a-C. Ancient Philosophy 9 (1):1-14.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Andrew Oxman Wolpert (2003). Addresses to the Jury in the Attic Orators. American Journal of Philology 124 (4):537-555.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Peter Bachrach (1958). The Senate Debate on the Right to Jury Trial Versus the Right to Vote Controversy: A Case Study in Liberal Thought. Ethics 68 (3):210-216.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Philip Pettit & Wlodek Rabinowicz, Appendix: The Jury Theorem and the Discursive Dilemma.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. W. D. Ross (1938). Value and Ethical Objectivity: A Study in Ethical Objectivity and the Objectivi of Value. By Gordon S. Jury. (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1937. Pp. 258. Price 7s. 6d.). [REVIEW] Philosophy 13 (49):105-.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Frederick A. Fullhardt (1934). Evolution of the Petty Jury. Thought 9 (1):46-61.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Eve Kitsik (2012). Eli Hirsch: Quantifier Variance and Realism: Essays in Metaontology. Trees and Tables Crackpot Ontology: Jury Still Out. Studia Philosophica Estonica 5 (1).score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Lynette Reid, Natalie Ram & R. Blake Brown (2006). Compensation for Gamete Donation: The Analogy with Jury Duty. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (01):35-43.score: 15.0
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. S. Craig Roberts & Jennifer Murray (2013). Applying the Revenge System to the Criminal Justice System and Jury Decision-Making. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (1):34-35.score: 15.0
    McCullough et al. propose an evolved cognitive revenge system which imposes retaliatory costs on aggressors. They distinguish between this and other forms of punishment (e.g., those administered by judges) which are not underpinned by a specifically designed evolutionary mechanism. Here we outline mechanisms and circumstances through which the revenge system might nonetheless infiltrate decision-making within the criminal justice system.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000