Week 3, Entry 2: Juries and Groupthink-a recipe for disaster?

In yesterday’s post, I mentioned how juries can be prone to bias and Groupthink, but the focus of the post dealt mostly with the exclusion of minorities from juries. Today I will focus on Groupthink. What is Groupthink? The American Heritage dictionary defines the term as “The act or practice of reasoning or decision-making by a group, especially when characterized by uncritical acceptance or conformity to prevailing points of view.” The danger of Groupthink within a jury is great, especially when there is pressure on minority dissenting jurors to agree with the majority, or on the jury as a whole to deliberate quickly and render a verdict.

While a jury must render a verdict as a group, our system was set up so that when legitimate doubt exists, a person is not convicted, and either an acquittal or a hung jury is the result. However, peer pressure within the jury group to conform to the majority view during deliberations has resulted in convictions even when reasonable doubt still existed in the minds of some jurors. This is a grave miscarriage of justice and should not be tolerated in our society. If they are made aware of pressure placed on a member or members of a jury, most judges will declare a mistrial. But the question one must ask is: How many times have jurors been pressured and been too intimidated or ashamed to reveal that they didn’t agree with the verdict?

So, how can we prevent Groupthink within juries and ensure that all jurors are permitted to think for themselves and vote their conscience, as the founding fathers intended? First, we must ensure that there is diversity within juries. A jury made up of people of any one group or too similar backgrounds can result in similar thinking and create Groupthink. Second, we must eliminate pressure placed on juries by members of the court or outside influences to render a verdict quickly. Jury deliberations should be a time when the evidence is discussed and conclusions are made as to whether the prosecution has met the standard of proof and eliminated all reasonable doubt. If a jury cannot reach a verdict (meaning the members are not in unanimous agreement), a mistrial should be declared based upon a hung jury.

The final way that we can help stop Groupthink in juries is to make it abundantly clear to jurors that pressuring other jurors to agree with the majority and render a verdict will not be tolerated. In all cases where jurors are pressured, criminal sanctions and penalties should be imposed against those exerting the pressure. There must be effective deterrents, or this practice will continue.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees our right to a fair and speedy trial. However, it is not an either/or situation. While a trial should be completed without unnecessary delay, it must also be fair-and a trial can never be considered fair if a jury is not truly unanimous in its verdict. Though mistrials and the resulting retrials can be expensive, it is a small price to pay compared to sending a person to prison or to death row when reasonable doubt may still exist in the minds of some jurors.