Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Voices From an Empty Chair: The Missing Witness Inference and the Jury

Voices From an Empty Chair: The Missing Witness Inference and the Jury According to the empty chair doctrine, lawyers may comment on the absence of a prospective opposing witness and judges may invite the jury to draw adverse inferences from that lack of evidence. A mock jury study was conducted to determine how people react to absent witnesses and evaluate the effects of empty chair comments on decision making. Fifty subjects read a trial transcript in which a central or peripheral defense witness did not testify, and in which the prosecuting attorney did or did not suggest making an adverse inference. Pre- and postdeliberation results indicated that subjects who were in the comment condition were less favorable to the defense when the missing witness was central, but they were more favorable when that witness was peripheral. These results are discussed for their practical implications. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior American Psychological Association

Voices From an Empty Chair: The Missing Witness Inference and the Jury

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/voices-from-an-empty-chair-the-missing-witness-inference-and-the-jury-QwWf3gYBYm

References (19)

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1007/BF01044828
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

According to the empty chair doctrine, lawyers may comment on the absence of a prospective opposing witness and judges may invite the jury to draw adverse inferences from that lack of evidence. A mock jury study was conducted to determine how people react to absent witnesses and evaluate the effects of empty chair comments on decision making. Fifty subjects read a trial transcript in which a central or peripheral defense witness did not testify, and in which the prosecuting attorney did or did not suggest making an adverse inference. Pre- and postdeliberation results indicated that subjects who were in the comment condition were less favorable to the defense when the missing witness was central, but they were more favorable when that witness was peripheral. These results are discussed for their practical implications.

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Feb 1, 1991

There are no references for this article.