According to the US Department of Justice, a trial is a “structured process where the facts of a case are presented to a jury so they can decide if the defendant is guilty or not”. Anyone who has faced a criminal trial knows that definition is lacking. It fails to convey the distinctly terrifying experience having one’s fate be decided by 12 strangers.
Also absent from the definition – the reality that the structured process doesn’t always work as it should. If it did, there wouldn’t be mistrials or wrongful convictions.
Trials Are Stressful
Facing criminal charges is extremely stressful and going through a criminal trial has significant negative psychological effects on human beings. For the accused, it creates a sense of helplessness. Defendants often experience depression and anxiety; some even resort to suicide. For the wrongly accused, negative effects also include loss of identity, trauma, stigmatization and adjustment difficulties.
The defendants aren’t the only ones who suffer during trials. Trials also have negative emotional effects on jurors. Research shows that at least two-thirds of jurors experienced physical and/or physical distress as a result of participation in a criminal trial. The intensity of these effects varies based on factors such as the nature of the crime, the testimony and evidence presented and length of the trial.
The psychological effects of participating in jury trial impact how jurors interpret and remember evidence. This is why criminal trials can be unpredictable, and verdicts can be shocking. No wonder so many criminal defendants opt for a plea deal to avoid the risk of lengthy sentences if convicted at trial.
Procedures Are Predictable, People Are Not
Defendants and jurors are not the only human beings involved in criminal trials. Witnesses also play a central role in criminal proceedings. Just like defendants and jurors, they, too are psychologically impacted the pressures of being involved in a criminal trial. But unlike jurors, witnesses are also psychologically impacted by the process of testifying.
There are many different types of witnesses: fact witnesses, eyewitnesses, expert witnesses, and character witnesses. Criminal rules of procedure attempt to standardize how witnesses, and their testimony, should be introduced and utilized at trial. However these rules vary by state and by jurisdiction. The ABA has set professional standards for how prosecutors should utilize witnesses at trial but examples of misuse of witness warrants abound.
To further complicate matters, it’s standard practice for prosecutors to make promises of favorable treatment in exchange for witness testimony. Prosecutors have a duty to disclose these arrangements – but don’t always do so. Concealing these agreements can vacate a conviction. But by that point, an innocent person has already been wrongfully convicted.
Human Recollections Are Imperfect
Eyewitness testimony accounts for the majority of wrongful convictions. But witnesses sometimes remember things inaccurately. Human memory is not 100% accurate and the brain is not a recording device. In addition, memory formation is inhibited by stressful situations. There is also evidence that witnesses can persist in believing their memory despite evidence that it’s false.
Those are significant problems. But they are not the biggest problem. Some prosecutors attempt to shape and influence witnesses’ memory. There have been cases where investigators have influenced eyewitness to choose a particular suspect. In some cases, witnesses will recant their testimony. This creates ethical and practical problems for prosecutors. It also creates psychological and emotional problems for those who realize they helped convict an innocent person. But those problems pale in comparison to the hardship endured by those who have spent decades in prison even after a key witness has recanted.
A Fallible Process
A trial is not simply a structured process “where the facts of a case are presented to a jury so they can decide if the defendant is guilty or not”. Rather, it is an unpredictable process that includes presenting unreliable and potentially misleading witness testimony. When jurors hear eyewitness testimony, they assume what they are hearing is truthful and accurate. That’s not a safe assumption.
Another reason trials cannot be seen as simply “structured processes for presenting the facts” – restrictions on defense attorneys’ ability to access information on witnesses for the prosecution. Despite the longstanding Brady rule, it’s only recently that some states began requiring prosecutors required to turn over their entire evidence file – including witness lists. But the problem remains. If prosecutors can demonstrate that turning over some material would harm a prospective witness, they can withhold evidence.
Given the potential impact and problematic nature of witness testimony, an effective defense strategy must include challenging witnesses on the stand. This means defense attorneys must have access to information about witnesses for the prosecution.
If prosecutors fail to disclose witness information to the defense they are interfering with the accused’s right to prepare an adequate defense – and violate their Sixth Amendment rights.
A better definition of jury trials would be “a predictably unpredictable process in which jurors make subjective determinations of how to place details from the story a witness tells into a narrative context”. Prosecutors have an advantage in shaping that story and who tells it.
An Urgent Problem with Crushing Consequences
New York State has the more wrongful convictions from eyewitness testimony than any other state. Although efforts to pass legislation changing how witness testimony is utilized have been attempted, New York still lags behind other states.
As a result, there are thousands of individuals currently incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. Although they continue to profess their innocence, most appeals remain unresolved leaving innocent people to no alternative but to petition for executive clemency. Getting an innocent person out of prison is a herculean task. It takes relentless effort and an unwillingness to give up on the part of the accused. It also takes excellent lawyers and sufficient resources to pay them. And then, it still takes good luck.
Without meaningful reform around the use of witness testimony, men and women will continue to be deprived of their liberty and unjustly incarcerated in inhumane conditions. Wrongful convictions happen all the time. For every one story that receives national attention, there are thousands of others that are never heard.
The same is true for those charged in federal criminal cases. Prosecutors often offer immunity and plea deals to secure witness testimony. They also make threats of new charges to secure witness testimony.
Who knew that in America, all it takes to lose your liberty and your freedom, is for someone to get on the stand and make a statement that they, or worse – prosecutors – know is not entirely true.