Happily-Ever-After Jury Duty

Court rooms are often used to resolve disputes between people, but for others, it is the chance for new and everlasting relationships.

 

In 2005, Stephanie Johnson and Kris Kuzmic, both nineteen at the time, were summoned for jury duty in Milwaukee County. Kris had caught Stephanie’s eyes before the trial began. Luckily for her, they were both picked for a twelve-person jury in the same cocaine dealer case and sat next to each other. Throughout trial, they slowly began to develop a relationship: they talked, laughed, and hung out together. Although they refrained from public display of affection, other jurors noticed them and their attraction for each other, so much so that the other jurors often commented that the “two [were] so cute together” and that they “should date,” which is exactly what happened after the trial ended. Now they are married to each other and finding love during jury duty has become much more common.  

When you get stuck for four or five days in a room with other people, you learn a lot about them: about their profession, about their family, about their perceptions, etc. The people serving on a jury with you, regardless of whether you get along with them right off the bat or not, affect your behavior when in a group setting like a jury. The Asch Study showed that people conformed to perceptions of others because of two reasons: (1) they believed the group was better informed than they were or (2) they wanted to fit in with the group.

 

When people change their mind because they believe the group is better informed than they are, they usually do so to conform to what they believe is the correct answer. For example, the Jenness’s 1932 experiment showed that individual guesses to the number of beans in a jar shifted closer to what other members thought when put together. 

 

However, social psychological researchers have consistently found that group members also adjust their view to conform to dominant and/or socially desirable stances. Furthermore, the social psychological researchers have found that distant relationships among jurors increase the odds of conformity, while close relationships among jurors decrease the odds of conformity. For example, a college student is more likely to drink at a sorority party when all her friends are doing it because she does not want to be the odd one out. 

 

As is evident, jurors, without love interests, are already heavily influenced by each other. Now, imagine people with love interests who are probably trying to increase his/her chances of scoring a date with another juror. How effective, accurate, and fair are verdicts rendered by jurors searching for love? Are plaintiffs and defendants getting an impartial jury or are jurors unintentionally violating defendant's sixth amendment right? Although some people suggest that conformity will always exist, and we should just account for that conformity effect and try to minimize it, I believe that something more should be done about this, such as anonymous deliberations or anonymous voting. Nevertheless, I wish Stephanie and Kris a happy marriage!