IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/68977.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does the placement of the accused at court undermine the right to a fair trial?

Author

Listed:
  • Rossner, Meredith

Abstract

The UK Government has recently launched an ambitious reform of the court estate across England and Wales, including the closure of 86 courts and signi cant investment in new technologies. The time is right to rethink how courts of the future should look, with an emphasis on exibility of space and the use of technology. A longstanding architectural feature of criminal courts is the dock, where the accused is held during a trial. In recent years, this has evolved to include a fully-glassed in box, or in some countries, metal cages. The continued use of docks may undermine the rights of the accused, including the right to participate in one’s trial, the right to be presumed innocent, and the right to be treated in a digni ed manner. I present the results of an experiment testing whether the placement of the accused in a dock can impact on mock-jurors assessment of guilt. Jurors were more likely to return a guilty verdict when the accused was in a dock, compared to sitting at the bar table with counsel, independent of the evidence against him. If the government is serious about creating fairer and more effective courts of the future, then they need discontinue the use of docks in criminal trials.

Suggested Citation

  • Rossner, Meredith, 2016. "Does the placement of the accused at court undermine the right to a fair trial?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68977, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:68977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68977/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Court architecture; criminal trial; human rights;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K10 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - General (Constitutional Law)
    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:68977. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.