The problem of judges' bias in pre-trial hearings.
Item
-
Title
-
The problem of judges' bias in pre-trial hearings.
-
Identifier
-
AAI9732939
-
identifier
-
9732939
-
Creator
-
Kuzyk, Irene L.
-
Contributor
-
Adviser: Lindsey Churchill
-
Date
-
1997
-
Language
-
English
-
Publisher
-
City University of New York.
-
Subject
-
Sociology, Criminology and Penology | Law
-
Abstract
-
This study investigates the hypothesized presence of bias in the behavior and the decisions that judges render as a result of their participation in exclusionary rule hearings. A focused review of the literature indicated that judicial decision-making in exclusionary rule hearings maybe biased against the rights of criminal defendants. The behavior of judges in these hearings may depart significantly from the presumed norm of impartial trier-of-fact.;For the purpose of analyzing the influence of subjective factors in exclusionary rule hearing outcomes, two-data gathering methods were undertaken: (1) the administration of an author constructed opinion survey with three, role-distinguished groups of exclusionary hearing participants, i.e. judges, prosecuting attorneys and defense attorneys; and (2) the application of Bales' Interaction Process Analysis (IPA) methods to the transcripts for a set of exclusionary or pre-trial hearings.;The main finding of the opinion survey is that judicial behavior during pre-trial hearings is perceived to be less than completely impartial by both defense attorneys and prosecuting attorneys, while judges indicate no departure from the norm of purely objective decision-making.;Transcripts from a sample of twenty-eight exclusionary rule hearings were subjected to the methods of Interaction Process Analysis. From the results, it was found that judges do not behave in a completely objective manner while presiding over pre-trial hearings. In general, judges tend to agree more with prosecutors than defense attorneys, to disagree less with prosecutors than with defense attorneys, and to express significantly more antagonism toward defense attorneys, their clients, and their witnesses than toward prosecuting attorneys and prosecution witnesses. It may be stated judges are more favorably disposed toward the prosecution than toward the defense in pre-trial hearings. Additional statistical analysis found that in cases in which evidence to suppress motions were granted, defense attorneys enjoyed far less expressive acts from judges during these hearings than those directed towards the prosecution side. These findings suggest that judges' bias against the defense appears to have an impact of judicial decisions in pre-trial hearings.
-
Type
-
dissertation
-
Source
-
PQT Legacy CUNY.xlsx
-
degree
-
Ph.D.
