•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Abstract

Purpose: Many U.S. adults are called upon to fulfill civic responsibilities through jury duty. Jury participation is a responsibility, but it is also a privilege that ensures the balance of power between government and citizens. Problems arise when jury instructions are presented using complex language that challenges the comprehension of laypersons with and without language and literacy differences, negatively influencing the juror’s participation experience and trial outcomes. In spite of plain language mandates and clear findings regarding the average literacy abilities of U.S. adults, much of the legal community persists in the use of difficult jury instructions.

Method: Academic literature from the legal, literacy and speech-language pathology disciplines was reviewed and summarized. In spite of plain language mandates and clear findings regarding the average literacy abilities of U.S. adults, much of the legal community persists in the use of difficult jury instructions.

Results: The current work proposes that school-based SLPs consider providing authentic experiences with courtroom discourses and literacies. SLPs should consider pursuing collaborative consultation relationships with the legal community, with the possibility of providing training. Advocacy should also include encouraging the legal community to apply Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles.

Conclusions: SLPs have an opportunity to contribute to society by assisting in the improvement of the process by which jurors are instructed.

Keywords: Language, Literacy, Disciplinary Literacy, Jury Instructions, Advocacy

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.