Inadmissible evidence and pretrial publicity: The effects (and ineffectiveness) of admonitions to disregard
Chapter
Overview
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
During a trial, jurors may be admonished to ignore pretrial publicity or inadmissible statements made by witnesses or attorneys. Pretrial publicity has been a long-standing concern of courts around the world. Constitutional guarantees of free speech compound the problem in the United States. This chapter discusses the findings of social science studies that have examined the effects of pretrial publicity. Various safeguards that are employed to control publicity effects are discussed. These safeguards include using jury selection to identify and remove biased jurors, delaying the start of the trial or changing the location of it, and admonishing jurors to disregard information. In addition, the chapter focuses on the effects of admonishing jurors to ignore inadmissible information revealed in court. Empirical research has demonstrated that admonitions are relatively ineffective and sometimes produce a "backfire effect," resulting in jurors relying more heavily on information they have been instructed to disregard. The issue of admonition ineffectiveness is explored through the application of several social psychological theories, including belief perseverance, the hindsight bias, reactance theory, and the theory of ironic processes of mental control. It appears that no single theory can provide a complete explanation for observed effects, and that it may be necessary to integrate several theoretical perspectives in order to improve admonition effectiveness. The chapter concludes with a discussion of policy recommendations and suggestions for future research in this area.
