首页> 外文OA文献 >Runaway judges? Selection effects and the jury
【2h】

Runaway judges? Selection effects and the jury

机译:失控法官?选择e ff ects和陪审团

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Reports about runaway jury awards have become so common that it is widely accepted that the US jury system needs to be u91fixed.u92 Proposals to limit the right to a jury trial and increase judicial discretion over awards implicitly assume that judges decide cases differently than juries. We show that there are large differences in mean awards and win rates across juries and judges. But if the types of cases coming before juries are different from those coming before judges, mean award and win rates may differ even if judges and juries would make the same decisions when faced with the same cases. We find that most of the difference in judge and jury mean awards can be explained by differences in the sample of cases coming before judges and juries. On some dimensions, however, there remain robust and suggestive differences between judges and juries.
机译:关于失陪的陪审团裁决的报道变得如此普遍,以至于美国陪审团制度需要得到固定。有关限制陪审团审判权并增加对裁决的司法裁量权的建议隐含地认为法官对案件的判决不同于对陪审团的判决。陪审团。我们表明,陪审团和法官的平均奖励和获胜率存在很大差异。但是,如果陪审团面前的案件类型与法官面前的案件类型不同,则即使法官和陪审团在面对相同案件时做出相同的决定,平均获胜率也会有所不同。我们发现,法官和陪审团在平均裁决上的大部分差异可以用法官和陪审团面前的案件样本中的差异来解释。但是,在某些方面,法官与陪审团之间仍然存在强烈的暗示性差异。

著录项

  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2008
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号