Fair Trial Analysis – Scientific Analysis of Trial Errors

Fair trial. Unfair trial. How do we know the difference?

“Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules. They apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court

Through careful research, we can measure the fairness of trials, making it possible to distinguish fair and unfair trials in a similar manner as an umpire calling balls and strikes.

Objective

Unbiased analysis based on published scientific research methods.

Fast

Most projects can be completed within one week.

Affordable

Jury research is not just for big firms. We assist those in need.

**Research Community** – Scientific Analysis of Trial Errors v.3.1.0 Available for R via CRAN

**Taking Action** – Amicus Brief Filed in Partial Support of Oklahoma Death Row Inmate Brenda Andrew

**Taking Action** – Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Georgia Death Row Inmate Warren King

**Taking Action** – What is an Amicus Curiae Brief?

**Forthcoming Article** – *Measuring Fairness*, Alabama Law Review (forthcoming Fall 2025).

**Published Research** – *If the Jury Only Knew: The Effect of Omitted Mitigation Evidence on the Probability of a Death Sentence*, 32 Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law 1 (Spring 2025).

**Published Research** – *A Scientific Framework for Analyzing the Harmfulness of Trial Errors*, 8 UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review 1 (2024).

Forthcoming Article – Evaluating Death Sentencing Procedures: Fairness, Disparities, and Constitutional Limits, University of Boston Public Interest Law Review (forthcoming Spring 2026). Offers objective quantitative analysis of effects of varying sentencing procedures, such as delegating selection decision to judges, non-unanimous verdict rules, procedures following jury impasse, and judicial override.

Forthcoming Article – Outdated and Unconstitutional: Rethinking Duration of Residency Requirements for Jury Service, Creighton Law Review (forthcoming Winter 2025). Contends that duration of residency requirement for jury service violates constitutional right to impartial jury selected from representative cross-section of community. Legislative history offers no basis for the exclusion, and it undermines, rather than advances, state interests.

Working Paper – Markov Chain Models of Small Group Deliberation. This manuscript details technical aspects of Markov chain models of jury deliberation. Models of binary choice are validated using benchmark data. Models of deliberation over ordered choices are developed, tested, and applied to classic works on jurors’ preferred verdicts under constrained options.