Originally posted by the Voice of America.
Voice of America content is produced by the Voice of America,
a United States federal government-sponsored entity, and is in
the public domain.


Why a Jury's Racial Composition Matters

Dora Mekouar

   The jury that convictedwhiteformer Minneapolis Police Officer Derek
   Chauvin of murder in the death ofAfrican AmericanGeorge Floyd consisted
   of five men and seven women, six of whom were white, four were Blackand
   two were multiracial, according to court information.

   The diversity of the jury mayhave contributed to a more just trial
   outcome.

   "A jury's racial composition does matter," says Sam Sommers, a
   professor of psychology at Tufts University,who studies stereotyping,
   prejudice and group diversity. "Bias seems more likely when we have
   homogeneous, or nondiverse, juries. With diverse juries seems to come
   morewide-rangingand representative discussion of facts in the case."

   Sommers conducted research with mock juries composed of sixpeople--some
   with an all-white panel,and others with two Black and four white
   jurors. He found that diverse juries were less likely to presume the
   defendant's guilt, more thorough in examining the evidence, clearer on
   the facts in the caseand tended to deliberate an average of 11 minutes
   longer than all-white juries.

   Moreover, Sommers saysother studies have shown that all-white juries
   are more punitive toward Black defendants than diverse juries.

   His research shows that white jurors tend to be more careful when
   evaluating the evidence if there are diverse jurors on the panel.

   "There's something about knowing or expecting to have conversations
   with people from different backgrounds, or different perspectives, that
   forces us to kick up our cognitive game and process information more
   carefully," Sommers says.
   FILE - A juror raises his hand while speaking to the press at the state
   Supreme Court after the judge declared a mistrial in the case of slain
   missing child Etan Patz, New York, May 8, 2015.

   Overall,however,diverse juries are the exception, rather than the rule.

   "I was surprised to learn that this [Chauvin]jury was diverse, because
   usually that's not the case in any state in this country. No state has
   really gotten it right," says Lila Silverstein, an attorney with the
   Washington Appellate Project. "Juries are supposed to reflect their
   communities, and our founders thought this was a critical element of
   democracy,because the government should not get to decide who should be
   locked up in prison, or even who should prevail in a civil dispute.
   Ordinary citizens exercise that right."

   Silverstein says there are major obstacles that keep minorities from
   serving on juries.

   "Some people don't come in because they can't afford it. Some people
   don't come in because theyhave tostay home and take care of their
   children. Some people don't come in because they have a prior criminal
   conviction and they think that disqualifies them," she says. "Some
   people don't come in because they've had negative experiences with the
   legal system, like being stopped for driving whileBlack, and they don't
   want any part of such a system."

   Other practices that Silverstein says need to be changed includesending
   ajury duty summonsby mail only,rather than also sending it via email,
   thereby improving the chances that the summons will be received. And
   the lists of potential jurors need to be drawn from multiple sourcesand
   not limited topeople with driver's licenses, she adds.

   Even if they do make it to the courthouse, potential jurors from
   minority groups can be among the first to be dismissed.

   "It's pretty apparent that prosecutors all across the country--and
   maybe there's less of it now--but they've systemically tried to exclude
   Blacks from juries," says AlanTuerkheimer, a Chicago jury consultant.
   "I think traditionallythe problem stems from prosecutors, where there's