|
Using
FactLogic, you can demonstrate exactly which facts elicit prejudice and the
degree to which it will be a problem – if any.
To
demonstrate prejudice within a venue, take the following steps:
-
Select The Alternate Venue.
-
Create The Case. Create your case by entering some case information,
the key facts, and one or more assertions to be proved by the facts.
-
Copy The Case. Copy the case so you won’t mingle evaluations from
the two venues. Simply click, "Copy Case."
-
Select Evaluators. Randomly draw a large number of evaluators from
each venue, and assign them to the appropriate copy of the case.
-
Select Measures of Prejudice. Each evaluator will judge the
probabilities for each fact and the standard of proof. From these
judgments, FactLogic will determine the probably that each assertion is
true, the margin (defined below), and predict the verdict. Select a value
to measure possible prejudice.
-
Analyze Results. The statistics computed by FactLogic may
demonstrate that prejudice exists in the current venue. If there is any
doubt, it can easily be demonstrated by conducting a test of
significance on any measure of prejudice. Basically, the test would
determine whether the selected measure from the venues are significantly
different.
1.
Create and Copy The Case
Create your case.
Include, at least, the assertion of most interest to the change of venue
request, and include the key facts for this or other assertions.
Make a copy of
your case for each venue so that results aren't mingled (i.e., simply click,
Copy Case).
2.
Select Evaluators
Select
two groups of evaluators, one in the current venue and one in the proposed
venue. Evaluators should be drawn randomly from the venire in each venue. Local
records or market research companies can provide
evaluators¹:
Evaluator
Information. If possible, obtain
demographic characteristics and life experience information from the two groups of
evaluators. It will help with subsequent jury selection: Evaluators who have certain
characteristics or experiences might judge key facts in certain ways, and you need to know
this before voir dire.
Number of
Evaluators.
The two groups of evaluators needn't be the same size, but larger is
better. The size will be dictated
by either
3,
Select Measures of Prejudice
FactLogic
provides the
following four values. Any of them could be considered measures of prejudice:
Measures Provided
Directly by Evaluators:
Measures Determined by FactLogic
(from values provided by evaluators): Since the real facts are not known
at this time, the following measures should be taken lightly.
-
Probability the assertion is true.
-
Difference between the probability the assertion is true and the
standard of proof. This difference is a more accurate measure of
prejudice than is the probability an assertion is true (by itself) because jurors decide
on this difference. This difference will be called the margin
in the following text.
-
Predicted
verdict.
Select any of
these measures.
4.
Analyze Results
Any of the measures of prejudice listed in Section 3 can be analyzed. The
margin, the difference between the probability the assertion is true and the standard of proof, is unusually compelling.
Each
evaluator determines his/her standard of proof,
called reasonable certainty (which is the opposite of reasonable doubt).
To justify a change of venue, compare the margin from the
current venue to the margin from the proposed venue. If the
difference between these two margins is significant, the justification for a
change of venue is scientifically demonstrated. However, if the
probabilities the assertions are true are small, the justification for a change of
venue might not be justified because the effect of prejudice is probably
insignificant.
Convex
Corporation can provide the statistical tests of significance for any
measures you choose.
|
