Discuss the different technologies used in the courtroom and some of the possible effects this technology can have on different aspects of the trial process and trial outcomes. What are some benefits and drawbacks to using virtual environments? Refer to available research.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Answers may vary.Today, technologies being used in courts extend far beyond surveillance videos which would have been novel only a few years ago. One noteworthy development is the proliferation of smartphone videos, particularly clips of encounters between citizens and police, which have dominated the news recently. Scores of websites dedicated to "cop-watching" now exist and various groups monitor high-crime areas for examples of hostile police-citizen interactions. Federal courts have affirmed the right to film police in action, and police departments have responded by investing in wearable cameras ("body-cams") which film their actions automatically.Technology has provided other tools for attorneys and judges to use during trials. These include• videoconferencing that permits live, two-way video and audio communication between hearings and trials in courtrooms and remote sites-useful when witnesses and defendants are medically incapacitated or incarcerated, and to allow for the presence of interpreters in a courtroom• electronic and digital evidence, such as digital recordings, documents, and photographs, that allows judges and jurors to easily observe the evidence themselves, rather than hear others' descriptions of it.• computer animations and simulations that feature computer-generated depictions of complex physical events like accidents and crimes, often accompanied by voice-overs from participants in the event.• virtual reality technologies that allow observers to experience a re-creation of an event as if they were actually present when it occurred. Virtual reality environments allow judges and jurors to immerse themselves in an artificially created world such as a crime scene, operating room, factory, or accident site to gauge for themselves what could be seen from different points of view and what likely happened given the circumstances.Each of these high-tech methods raises interesting and complex questions that psychologists have begun to address. What effect does remote viewing have on a judge or juror's ability to determine whether a witness is credible and sincere? Are nuances of body language and verbal expression adequately captured in videoconferencing, or are they missing? Does the person testifying at a remote site-a setting that lacks the trappings and formality of a courtroom-feel less obligated to show respect and tell the truth? Answers are beginning to emerge and they suggest that, among other things, defendants may be disadvantaged by videoconferencing. It results in less favorable outcomes for defendants in bail hearings, perhaps because it tends to be brief. Remote video technologies result in more deportations in immigration cases than in-person hearings because detained persons on video are less engaged in the adversarial process.