Description

Judge interventions in criminal trials: A mixed qualitative and quantitative study

AUGUSTO GNISCI AND ANGIOLA DI CONZA

Faculty of Psychology, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy

Abstract

This contribution studies judges’ interventions (spontaneity, type, modality, duration, outcome) during the examinations led by prosecutor, defence and civil party in three criminal trials. Through a combined qualitative and quantitative approach, the relevant categories concerning the characteristics of the interventions were identified and applied to video-recorded materials. Overall, the identified judges’ interventions are N = 443. Our results show that most of the interventions were not requested by the parties, aimed to ask/provide information rather than recall to duties or reformulation, were executed in a paternalistic way or in a neutral/logic manner rather than in a helping/supporting or reprimanding one, and finished in agreement rather than compromise, disagreement or negative outcome. Log-linear analyses show that judges behaved positively toward interviewees and prosecutors and negatively toward defence attorneys. The variability among judges’ behaviors and trials are discussed under a theoretical point of view and according to their implications for the legal system and the training of judges.

Keywords: conversational interventions, coding schemes, judges, legal language, blended methods, qualitative and quantitative research