Is the taint argument real? Public perceptions of juries that include felon-jurors

References

• Alexander, M. (2012). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, B., Ryan, A., & Weichman, D. (2004). Justice expectations and applicant perceptions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12(1-2), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0965-075X.2004.00261.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2009). A Felon Deliberates: Policy Implications of the Michigan Supreme Court's Holding in People v. Miller. U. Det. Mercy L. Rev., 87, 59.
   Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2014). A field study of the presumptively biased: Is there empirical support for excluding convicted felons from jury service? Law & Policy, 36(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2018a). Summonsing criminal desistance: Convicted felons’ perspectives on jury service. Law & Social Inquiry, 43(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2018b). Felon-jurors in vacationland: A field study of transformative civic engagement in Maine. Maine Law Review, 71(1), 74–106.
   Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2018c). Cops and convicts: An exploratory study of jurymandering. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 16(1), 221–239.
   Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2018d). Exorcising presumptions? Judges and attorneys contemplate “felon-juror inclusion” in Maine. Justice System Journal, 39(4), 378–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2018.1496497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2019). Jury diversity in the age of mass incarceration: An exploratory mock jury experiment examining felon-jurors’ potential impacts on deliberations. Psychology, Crime & Law, 25(4), 345–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1528359
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M. (2021). Twenty million angry men: The case for including convicted felons in our jury system. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M., & Petersen, N. (2020a). Public perceptions of felon-juror exclusion: An exploratory study. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 21(5), 593–613. http://doi.org/10.1177/1748895819898518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M., & Petersen, N. (2020b). No fear here: How the public views anticipated interactions with jurors convicted of a Felony. Berkeley J. Crim. L., 25, 61.
   Google Scholar
• Binnall, J. M., & Petersen, N. (2021). They’re just different: The bifurcation of public attitudes toward felon-jurors convicted of violent offenses. Crime, Law and Social Change, 75(1), 3–19. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-020-09912-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornstein, B. H., Hamm, J. A., Dellapaolera, K. S., Kleynhans, A., & Miller, M. K. (2020). Just: A measure of jury system trustworthiness. Psychology, Crime & Law, 26(8), 797–822. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2020.1740222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, A. L., Burton Jr., V. S., Cullen, F. T., Pickett, J. T., Butler, L. C., & Thielo, A. J. (2020b). Beyond the new Jim Crow: Public support for removing and regulating collateral consequences. Federal Probation, 84(3), 19–59.
   Google Scholar
• Burton, A. L., Cullen, F. T., Burton, V. S., Graham, A., Butler, L. C., & Thielo, A. J. (2020). Belief in redeemability and punitive public opinion: “Once a criminal, always a criminal” revisited. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(6), 712–732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820913585
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, A. L., Cullen, F. T., Pickett, J. T., Burton, V. S., & Thielo, A. J. (2021). Beyond the eternal criminal record: Public support for expungement. Criminology & Public Policy, 20(1), 123–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celestin, B. D., & Kruschke, J. K. (2019). Lay evaluations of police and civilian use of force: Action severity scales. Law and Human Behavior, 43(3), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Champely, S. (2020). pwr: Basic Functions for Power Analysis. R package version 1.3-0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pwr.
   Google Scholar
• C.J.M. (1967). Civil disabilities of felons. Virginia Law Review, 53(2), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.2307/1071440
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodd, S. (2018). The punitive woman? Gender differences in public attitudes toward parole among an Australian sample. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62, 3006–3022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doris, J. (2002). Lack of character: Personality and moral behavior. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, L., & Diamond, S. S. (2003). Race, diversity, and jury composition: Battering and bolstering legitimacy. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 78(3), 1033–1060.
   Google Scholar
• Ewald, A. C. (2012). Collateral consequences in the American states. Social Science Quarterly, 93(1), 211–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00831.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fagan, R. W. (1981). Public support for the courts: An examination of alternative explanations. Journal of Criminal Justice, 9(6), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2352(81)90087-8
   Google Scholar
• Fukurai, H., & Davies, D. (1997). Affirmative action in jury selection: Racially representative juries, racial quotas, and affirmative juries of the Hennipin model and the jury de medietate linguae. Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, 4(3), 645–682.
   Google Scholar
• Garland, D. (1996). The limits of the sovereign state: Strategies of crime control in contemporary society. British Journal of Criminology, 36(4), 445–471. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hans, V. P., & Vidmar, N. (1986). Judging the jury. Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hans, V. P., & Vidmar, N. (2008). The verdict on juries. Judicature, 91(5), 226–230.
   Google Scholar
• Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of personal relations. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, B. D., Le Grand, A. M., Neuschatz, J. S., Golding, J. M., Wetmore, S. A., & Price, J. L. (2021). Testing the forensic confirmation bias: How jailhouse informants violate evidentiary independence. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-020-09422-x.
   Google Scholar
• Kalt, B. C. (2003). The exclusion of felons from jury service. American University Law Review, 53(1), 67–115.
   Google Scholar
• Kukucka, J., & Kassin, S. M. (2014). Do confessions taint perceptions of handwriting evidence? An empirical test of the forensic confirmation bias. Law and Human Behavior, 38(3), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000066
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawless, J. L., & Fox, R. L. (2001). Political participation of the urban poor. Social Problems, 48(3), 362–385. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2001.48.3.362
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levi, M., Sacks, A., & Tyler, T. (2009). Conceptualizing legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209338797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynch, M., & Haney, C. (2011). Mapping the racial bias of the white male capital juror: Jury composition and the “empathic divide”. Law & Society Review, 45(1), 69–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2011.00428.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacCoun, R. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The basis of citizens’ perceptions of the criminal jury: Procedural fairness, accuracy, and efficiency. Law and Human Behavior, 12(3), 333–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01044389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maruna, S., & King, A. (2009). Once a criminal, always a criminal?: ‘Redeemability’ and the psychology of punitive public attitudes. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 15(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-008-9088-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, M. K., Pfeifer, J., Bornstein, B. H., & Kaplan, T. (2021). Trust in the jury system: A comparison of Australian and US samples. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1862002.
   Google Scholar
• Moss, S. A., Lee, E., Berman, A., & Rung, D. (2019). When do people value rehabilitation and restorative justice over the punishment of offenders?. Victims and Offenders, 14, 32–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouellette, H. M., Applegate, B. K., & Vuk, M. (2017). The public’s stance on prisoner reentry: Policy support and personal acceptance. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 4, 768–789.
   Google Scholar
• Pager, D. (2003). Blacks and ex-cons need not apply. Contexts, 2(4), 58–59. https://doi.org/10.1525/ctx.2003.2.4.58
   Google Scholar
• Palan, S., & Schitter, C. (2018). Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 17, 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2017.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. (2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plaks, J. E., Levy, S. R., & Dweck, C. S. (2009). Lay theories of personality: Cornerstones of meaning in social cognition. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00222.x
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. URL https://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Reich, S. E. (2017). An exception to the rule: Belief in redeemability, desistance signals, and the employer’s decision to hire a job applicant with a criminal record. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 56(2), 110–136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, P. H., & Darley, J. M. (1997). The utility of desert. Northwestern University Law Review, 91(2), 453–499. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.10195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shannon, S. K. S., Uggen, C., Schnittker, J., Thompson, M., Wakefield, S., & Massoglia, M. (2017). The growth, scope, and spatial distribution of people with felony records in the United States, 1948–2010. Demography, 54(5), 1795–1818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0611-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, D. L., & Kirkman, B. L. (2001). Anticipatory injustice: The consequences of expecting injustice in the workplace. In J. Greenberg, & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational justice (pp. 152–178). New Lexington.
   Google Scholar
• Soss, J. (2005). Making clients and citizens: Welfare policy as a source of status, belief, and action. In A. L. Schneider, & H. M. Ingram (Eds.), Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy (pp. 291–328). Suny Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, R., & Uggen, C. (2020). Criminal records and college admissions: A modified experimental audit. Criminology; An interdisciplinary Journal, 58(1), 156–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturges, H. A., Flick, C., Provenza, K., & Nunez, N. (2022). Civil juror compensation and judgments of police use of force at the intersection of race and mental illness. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 514–531. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2561
   Google Scholar
• Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. R. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5893.3703002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R. (2001). Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and minority group members want from the law and legal institutions? Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 19(2), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.438
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. Crime and Justice, 30, 283–357. https://doi.org/10.1086/652233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press. Original work published 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R. (2009). Legitimacy and criminal justice: The benefits of self-regulation. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 7, 307–359.
   Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R., Casper, J., & Fisher, B. (1989). Maintaining allegiance toward political authorities: The role of prior attitudes and the use of fair procedures. American Journal of Political Science, 33(3), 629–645. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, P., & Rabuy, B. (2017). Mass incarceration: The whole pie 2017. Prison Policy Initiative, https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2017.html.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, P., & Walsh, A. (2016). States of incarceration: The global context 2016. Prison Policy Initiative, Retrieve from https://www.prisonpolicy.org/global/2016.html.
   Google Scholar
• Weary, G. (1984). Current issues in attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 35(1), 427–459. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.35.020184.002235
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weiner, B. (2010). Attribution theory. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGraw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (Vol. 6, pp. 558–563). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Wheelock, D. (2012). A jury of one’s peers: Felon-Juror exclusion and racial inequality in Georgia courts. Justice System Journal, 32(3), 335–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2011.10767996.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkenfeld, J. (2004). Newly compelling: Reexamining judicial construction of juries in the aftermath of Grutter v. Bollinger. Columbia Law Review, 104(8), 2291–2327. https://doi.org/10.2307/4099360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolard, J. L., Harvell, S., & Graham, S. (2008). Anticipatory injustice among adolescents: Age and racial/ethnic differences in perceived unfairness of the justice system. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 26(2), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yankah, E. N. (2004). Good guys and bad guys: Punishing character, equality and the irrelevance of moral character to criminal punishment. Cardozo Law Review, 25, 1019–1067.
   Google Scholar
• YouGov. (2014). Most people think felons should be allowed to vote. Politics and Current Affairs. Available at: https://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/6y0puy011c/tabs_HP_felon_voting_20140213.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• YouGov. (2016). Most people think released felons should have the vote. Politics and Current Affairs. Available at: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/yskixde632/tabs_OP_Disenfranchising_Felons_20160425.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z., & Mai, Y. (2018). WebPower: Basic and Advanced Statistical Power Analysis. R package version 0.5.2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=WebPower.
   Google Scholar
• Cases Cited
   Google Scholar
• Amaya v. State 220 S.W. 98. (1920).
   Google Scholar
• Apodaca et al. v. Oregon 406 U.S. 404. (1972).
   Google Scholar
• Peters v. Kiff 407 U.S. 493. (1972).
   Google Scholar
• R.R.E. v. Glenn 884 S.W.2d 189. (1994).
   Google Scholar
• United States v. Greene 86 Ohio App.3d 620. (1993).
   Google Scholar
• United States v. Hines 55 F Supp. 2d 62. (1999).
   Google Scholar