Recently released documents from the University Honor Committee show opinions of student jurors about the honor system vary widely based on the outcome and perceived fairness of the trial. Further, jurors involved in trials that result in not guilty verdicts are much more likely to criticize the honor system or the single sanction.
The documents released by the Committee include 332 juror surveys covering 35 Honor trials from April 2004 to October 2005. Juror surveys are completed by student jurors after deliberations have ended and before the verdict is read. The optional form contains eight questions, concerning a variety of aspects of the trial, including the juror's impressions of the honor system both before and after the experience, the usefulness of the juror orientation, how well-prepared and professional the counsel and advisors appeared and a question on the single sanction.
The surveys are "more to give us information on what they took away from their experience as a juror and ways to improve the orientation session," Vice Chair for Trials Stewart Ackerly said.
The outcomes of the 35 trials discussed in the surveys included 15 with guilty and 20 with not guilty verdicts.
Results drawn from surveys suggest some general trends among the opinions of student jurors.
Fifty-four percent of student jurors had positive ideas of the honor system prior to the trial, while 14 percent indicated they thought negatively and nearly a third said they had no set opinion.
Regardless of the trial's outcome, most jurors felt they understood the honor system well after their experience. About 71 percent said they felt well-educated about the honor process and only 1.5 percent of jurors indicated they still did not understand the system.
A significant portion of jurors, about 32 percent, said there was some aspect of the process which made them feel uncomfortable. The most commonly given cause of uneasiness involved the difficulty of judging another student given the consequences of a guilty verdict.
Overall, the number of jurors who indicated they had a positive opinion of the honor system decreased from 54 to 49 percent following the trial. After the trial 15 percent said they had a more negative opinion of the honor system, as compared to 14 percent prior to the trial. About 28 percent of jurors -- both ones who originally had positive ideas concerning honor and those who disliked some aspects -- said their opinions had not changed.
In trials that ended in a guilty verdict, student jurors were more likely to indicate they had a positive impression of the honor system. Only 10 percent of jurors involved in trials with guilty verdicts said they had a negative opinion of honor after the trial, as compared to 52.9 percent who expressed a positive opinion.
Of the 15 juries that returned guilty verdicts, only two had more negative responses following the trial than before. In these two cases, students cited a poor defense counsel and problems with the single sanction as causes of discontent.
Overall, 20.8 percent of jurors in guilty trials indicated they had some problem with the single sanction, with 14.7 percent saying they would not have voted "not guilty" if there had been a punishment option other than the single sanction.
In contrast, trials that ended in not guilty verdicts were much more likely to suggest juror dissatisfaction with the honor system. Exactly 50 percent of jurors said they had positive opinions of the honor system following the trial while negative opinions of the system rose to 20 percent.
In the 18 not guilty trials, there were seven in which a significant number of jurors switched from positive to negative impressions of the honor system. Four of these cases involved jurors who felt the cases were not serious enough to warrant prosecution, including one concerned with parking violations and another brought by a police officer for a defendant lying while drunk. Another case concerned three defendants accused of the same crime and prosecuted with the same evidence. Two of the accused were found guilty and the third not guilty because of an what a few jurors said they believed was an emotional appeal to the jury.
Jurors in not guilty trials were also more likely to express some dissatisfaction with the single sanction. Roughly 23.3 percent of jurors involved in trials with not guilty verdicts said they had some problems with the single sanction, and 20.6 percent of jurors indicated they would have voted differently if there was a graduated punishment system.
Honor Chair David Hobbs said he was not surprised with the result that students involved in not guilty trials were less satisfied with the system.
"I'd say that it's because of the way we structure our process because it favors the student," Hobbs said. "We don't want to expel someone unless it's beyond reasonable doubt. Some students get frustrated with that high standard."
Furthermore, Hobbs said that even though a number of students were unhappy with the single sanction, he does not think it necessarily warrants change.
"Our system is still working effectively even with that percent having that opinion," Hobbs said. "If we couldn't ever enforce the honor system, if no one was ever found guilty because everyone didn't like the single sanction, I would say that would warrant some change"
Read More
U.Va. loses over $60 million in federal research cuts
By Bertie Azqueta | YesterdayThe impacted grants include three from the NIH, seven from the NEH, one from the United States Agency for International Development and four from the State Department.
Department of Education reverses course, awards Federal Executive Institute to U.Va.
By Ford McCracken | 4 days agoThe ED had previously awarded the institute to Charlottesville City Schools.
Students reflect on the life and legacy of Pope Francis
By Bertie Azqueta | 4 days agoAt the University, students shared a range of perspectives on his legacy of reform, inclusivity and his impact on the global Catholic community.
