In interviews with jurors inquiring how they arrived at their verdicts, researchers found that 40 percent of the references jurors made were to factors that had not been included in courtroom testimony. To improve the jury system, the researchers suggested that judges give instructions to the jury at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end. They argued that this would permit jurors to concentrate on the most relevant evidence rather than filling in gaps with their own assumptions, which have little to do with the legality of a case.

The answer to which of the following questions is LEAST directly relevant to evaluating the researchers’ suggestion above?

A. Is it possible for a judge to instruct a jury at the end of a trial in such a way that jurors will disregard any irrelevant factors they had been using to weigh the evidence?

B. Will a jury that hears a judge’s instructions at the beginning of a trial be able to weigh the evidence accordingly once that evidence has actually been presented?

C. Will having judges give instructions at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end significantly alter the customary procedures employed by the judicial system?

D. Were the methods and or interview processes used by the researchers biased in any way?

E. If jurors hear the judge’s instructions at the beginning of a trial, what percentage of the factors that influence their decisions will be matters that were not presented in the evidence?
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

+1 C

C. Will having judges give instructions at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end significantly alter the customary procedures employed by the judicial system?

Why the judicial system change? We are only concerned with the outcome when the judge gives the jury some instructions
_________________

Giving +1 kudos is a better way of saying 'Thank You'.

conclusion : judges give instructions to jury at beginning of a trail rather than at end
premise 1: researchers conducted interviews with jurors on how they arrive at verdicts.
premise 2: researchers found 40% of ref made by jurors are not included in courtroom testimony
premise 3: instructions at the beginning would help jurors to concentrate on most relevant facts

A. Is it possible for a judge to instruct a jury at the end of a trial in such a way that jurors will disregard any irrelevant factors they had been using to weigh the evidence? if this is ture then there is no need to instruct at beginning of trail. hence this statement impacts researcher Conclusion

B. Will a jury that hears a judge’s instructions at the beginning of a trial be able to weigh the evidence accordingly once that evidence has actually been presented? impacts premise 3

C. Will having judges give instructions at the beginning of a trial rather than at the end significantly alter the customary procedures employed by the judicial system? no impacts on any of the premise or conclusion. hence the correct answer

D. Were the methods and or interview processes used by the researchers biased in any way? impacts overall process and conclusion. if process was baised then conclusion made in the statement will surely be in doubt

E. If jurors hear the judge’s instructions at the beginning of a trial, what percentage of the factors that influence their decisions will be matters that were not presented in the evidence? impacts premise 2. If this percent is lower than percent given in premise 2, then conclusion will be impacted

what is the difficulty level of this question ?