Abstract
In 1982, wealthy, jet-setting carmaker John DeLorean was arrested for conspiracy to smuggle cocaine. Despite the fact that the FBI had videotapes of DeLorean with a suitcase full of drugs, DeLorean was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. Why? DeLorean’s trial makes for a vivid and instructive first look at the jury.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Steven Brill, who inteviewed 11 of the 12 DeLorean jurors and some of the other participants, reported the results of his research in “Inside the DeLorean Jury Room,” in the December 1984 issue of American Lawyer, pp. 1, 94–105. Our description of the DeLorean trial is based on his excellent account of the case, the jury deliberation process, and jurors’ perceptions of the trial. All direct quotes from the jurors are taken from his article. We only touch on some of the findings here. The reader is referred to the Brill article for more in-depth presentation of the reactions of the DeLorean jurors. In addition, a number of key points made in the Brill article were corroborated by others. For instance, the defense strategy, the problem of pretrial publicity, and the judge’s perspective were discussed in a symposium presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association in Los Angeles, August 1985, entitled Psychology and Law in the John DeLorean Trial, which included Judge Robert Takasugi, defense attorney Donald Re, and three psychologists (cited as “Symposium”). The facts of the case and the multiple reasons by which jurors reached their decision to acquit DeLorean were laid out in a number of newspaper articles, including Lindsey, R. (1984, August 17). Jurors cite entrapment and failure to prove case. The New York Times, pp. A1, B6; Cummings, J. (1984, August 17). DeLorean is freed of cocaine charge by a federal jury. The New York Times, pp. A1, B6; and Mathews, J. (1984, August 17). DeLorean acquitted of all eight charges in drug-scheme trial. The Washington Post, pp. A1, A12. Reactions to the verdict were provided in MacDonald, K. (1984, August 17). Not guilty: Verdict’s affect (sic) on ‘stings’ eyed. The Washington Post, pp. A1, A12; and Margolick, D. (1984, August 17). A case for DeLorean. The New York Times, p. B6.
Brill (1984), p. 96; Cummings (1984); Mathews (1984).
Brill (1984), p. 94; Symposium (1985).
Brill (1984), p. 94; Symposium (1985)
Both quotes are from Brill (1984), p. 95.
Brill (1984), p. 95.
Brill (1984), p. 96.
Brill (1984), p. 97.
Both quotes are from Brill (1984), p. 98.
Brill (1984), p. 100; Cummings (1984).
Brill (1984), p. 98.
Brill (1984), p. 101.
Brill (1984), p. 94.
14Brill (1984), p. 102.
Mathews (1984), p. A12; Brill (1984), p. 103.
16Brill (1984), pp. 103–104.
Brill (1984), p. 104.
Brill (1984), p. 105.
Brill (1984), p. 1.
Burger, W. A. (1971). The state of the federal judiciary. American Bar Association Journal, 57, 855–861
Burger, W.A. (1981, February). Is our jury system working? Readers Digest, 118, 126–130.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1986 Valerie P. Hans and Neil Vidmar
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hans, V.P., Vidmar, N. (1986). Introduction. In: Judging the Jury. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6463-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-6463-2_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-306-42255-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-6463-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive