U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Improving Courtroom Communication: A Procedural Justice Experiment in Milwaukee

NCJ Number
244498
Author(s)
Erin J. Farley; Elise Jensen; Michael Rempel
Date Published
January 2014
Length
88 pages
Annotation
This evaluation of a pilot project explored defendant perceptions of procedural justice.
Abstract
This document provides an evaluation of a pilot project at the Milwaukee County Criminal Court to enhance defendant perceptions of procedural justice by improving the oral, written, and nonverbal communication used by judges. In court settings, procedural justice concerns the role of fair and respectful procedures and interpersonal treatment in shaping assessments of legal authorities and reactions to specific case outcomes. Among the findings, courtroom observations measured an increase in the use of 14 practices that helped improve communication. Judges became more likely to begin the court session by explaining why cases would be called in a certain order; make eye contact with defendants; use plain English to explain procedures and decisions; ask if defendants or their attorneys had anything to say before the decision; and demonstrate an interest in the defendants understanding of plea agreements. Study findings indicate that the one-day training and subsequent development of judicial action plans can lead to concrete improvements in courtroom communication. The most influential dimensions of procedural justice were found to be voice (perceived ability to convey one's side of the story), respect (perceived respectful treatment), and helpfulness (perceived interest in meeting defendant's needs). This study confirmed a consistent theme in other recent research that perceptions of the judge play the most critical role in influencing overall defendant impressions of their court experience. Tables, figures, references, and appendixes