When third-year College student Adam Boyd decided to make his Oct. 19 honor trial public he turned his case from a private procedure to a community concern that questions the possible repercussions of an open trial.
These questions can probe into the psychological differences among those involved in the open trial, including the jury and the accused.
Monday's article discussed the history of open trials at the University and their various effects on the system. Today's article will investigate what an open trial means for the accused student and the community of trust around them.
"I felt there was an injustice being done," Boyd said. "I wanted this made public so it could be in the eyes of students and faculty."
Other students looking to vindicate themselves in a public forum have shared Boyd's sentiment. The majority of students who maintain their innocence, however, choose to hold closed hearings.
"The only reason this is a major aspect of any sort of accusation is one's reputation," Psychology Prof. Jonathan Haidt said. "That's why trials are secret."
Other faculty agreed that community pressure on accused students, and their standing at the University, can be great.
"When I was a student at the University the most horrible thing I could imagine was not going to Vietnam -- it was being kicked out for an honor offense," Politics Prof. Larry J. Sabato said.
But Haidt explained that students might choose an open trial for similar reasons.
"They might feel the need to clear their name and make it public," Haidt said.
Though the psychological pressure on a student in such a situation is great, others involved in the process also feel the effects of open proceedings.
Jurors in particular feel the weight of the eyes of the community at any open trial. In the United States' open legal system jurors historically face pressure, but at the University the majority of student juries operate under the umbrella of anonymity.
"Jurors are worried about privacy at any trial," Psychology Prof. Barbara A. Spellman said. "All you do is come out with a verdict, so there is some anonymity but not totally because jurors must reach a unanimous verdict."
Indeed, jurors in the upcoming open trial will have to deliver Boyd's verdict in full view of the University community.
Pressure from their peers is not the only potential effect of an open trial on jurors -- the media attention surrounding such proceedings can drain a jury pool of people who are ignorant to trial specifics.
"Pretrial publicity has been widely studied and in many cases you are not going to find jurors who have not heard about the trial," Spellman said. "To the extent that they will already have an opinion this is bad because they won't make a decision solely upon the facts at trial."
In a community such as the University where jurors are drawn from such a small pool, such concerns are magnified.
"We hope that jurors will make their decision in the same way they would at a closed trial," Honor Chairman Christopher Smith said. "We treat an open case like any other."
However, pressure also may fall upon those charged with administering honor system procedure at a trial, as their every act is subject to public scrutiny.
Law Prof. Kenneth Abraham referenced the battle over cameras in U.S. courtrooms as an example of the effects of open proceedings, and the pressures they bring.
"The Honor Committee has much less incentive to consider what the public thinks of it at a closed trial and may be more careful to follow procedure at an open proceeding," Abraham said. "However people may do things at public trial that are made for public consumption."
The University community may feel the most serious effects of the open trial. While most trials are out of sight, out of mind for students, an open trial could provide a serious reminder of the consequences of honor violations.
"If the point of the honor system is to act as a deterrent, then open trials could act as examples," Abraham said.
Haidt said he thinks open trials could help enforce the honor code, but that one case may not be enough.
"A single case won't make a major difference," he said. "But if people heard more about the system it would make a difference."
Though the pressures the upcoming trial will exert could cause many different outcomes, the publicity and community interest will certainly influence the character of the case.
Read More
What is U.Va.’s Faculty Senate?
By Adeline Miller | 2 days agoThe Senate is able to represent the faculty perspective to legislative bodies through positions such as the faculty representative to the Board of Visitors.
UJC finalizes 15 cases in spring semester
By Grace Little | 3 days ago10 pending cases remain on the docket to be processed in the fall.
Democrats, Republicans fight after Cuccinelli’s appointment blocked in committee vote
By Ford McCracken | 3 days agoThe Committee also blocked appointees to the Board of Visitors at other Virginia schools.
