7: 73-89 (2018)
1 2 2005 JR 3 2011 34 =21.1 =1.6 DVD 45 a 2015 b 2005 4 25 JR c 2011 1 12 1 2 1 a. b. 1 9 c. 1 9 2 a. b. 1 9 c. 1 9 5 12 1 a a DVD DVD 1 b c 6 5 34 6 b c
6 3 b 3 c 1 30 1 (2) JR 3 2 1 1 a 21% 34 7 DVD 9 8.1 =0.9 9 7.6 =1.6 79% 2 JR 2009 2009 / 38 13 47 16 15% 5 2 2 =5.71, <.10 50% 17 -8.5( 9) 8.5 9 1 (2, 31)=3.94, <.05 -3.9 2.6 <.05
2.6 -3.9 0.1 -5 0 5 15% KJ 1967 1970 1.2 =0.4 1 1 77% 54% 60% 20% 20% 50% 31% 77% 10 54% 7 0% 0 8% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 20% 1 60% 3 20% 1 0% 0 50% 8 31% 5 6% 1 0% 0 13% 2 0% 0 19% 3 53% 18 35% 12 3% 1 6% 2 15% 5 3% 1 9% 3
9 2 (8, 248)=14.85, <.005 2.3 4.7 4.0 7.1 6.9 6.7 6.2 (4.6) <.05 (16, 248)=2.70, <.001 (2, 279)=4.06, <.05: (2,279)=4.86, <.01: (2, 279)=3.07, <.05 6.8 3.5 <.05 >.10 (8, 248)=7.42, F(8, 248)=7.35, (8, 248)=5.49 <.001 3.5 3.5 2.7 7.7 (6.2) 7.3 5.9 7.2 4.8 7.7 7.3 <.05 1.4 6.6 5.0 5.4 6.2 6.2 6.8 5.8 2.3 6.8 6.6 6.9 4.9 (4.7) (5.3) 6.6 3.6 (4.7) <.05 1% 1% 5%
36 12 58 19 6% 2 2 2 =13.27, <.01 6% 69% 23 48% 16 58% 19 7.2 4.8 2.7 3.5 3.5 5.9 7.3 6.2 7.7 5.8 2.8 1.4 6.8 6.2 6.2 5.4 5.0 6.6 6.6 5.3 2.3 4.7 3.6 4.9 6.9 6.6 6.8 1 5 9
F1 F2 F3 .95 .08 .02 .63 .03 -.12 .57 -.08 .20 -.06 .85 .06 -.04 .77 -.09 .27 .48 -.04 .01 -.09 .87 -.08 .24 .66 .11 -.14 .40 25.43 23.11 17.96 48.54 66.50 -.05 .10 .19 Note. F1 F2 F3
0.3 -0.4 -0.2 -0.2 0.8 -0.1 0.1 -0.7 0.1 -1 0 1
33% 5 73% 11 7% 1 20% 3 53% 8 20% 3 7% 1 22% 4 61% 11 33% 7 22% 4 11% 2 11% 2 11% 2 27% 9 67% 22 24% 8 21% 7 30% 10 15% 5 9% 3
F1 F2 .81 .29 .78 .01 .69 -.38 -.11 .75 .22 .53 -.24 .50 .07 .45 36.83 24.52 61.36
-0.4 0.3 -0.3 0.3 -1 0 1 1.00 .31 1.00 -.23 -.20 1.00 .06 .12 .29 1.00 .09 .09 .30 -.03 1.00 -.26 -.08 .72** .43* .09 1.00 -.17 -.13 .56** .45** .31 .44* 1.00
79% DVD 47% 38% 15% 58 36% 6% 2009 2.6 -3.9 -8.5 8.5 2013 60% , (20%) 77% 54% 2011
45% 55% 55 39% 6% 82% 4.0 -8.5 8.5 61% 75% 33% 53% JR JR 54% JR
2012 3 2013 2011 2012 2012 2011 5 62 2011d 2011c 8 33 6 2000 2011e 2011b [ ] 1) 2010 / JR 2010 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012 2012 9000 / 2012 / 2013 3 / 2016 JSPS 24101506 [ ] , , 1033, 2011 1-3 . 2009 174-184. , , 2011 4 26
, 72 2010 , 193-200 58 3 2013 14-17 NGO 2011 6 15 , <http://kaiteingo.ti-da.net/e3594962.html> 2013 1 19 82 11 2010 , 1-3 : 55 3/4 2011 , 435-460 2011 , 408-430 52 2 2015 467-494 2013 15 75 2014 7 15 http://www.courts.go.jp/vcms_lf/20902001.pdf 2015 4 13 2009 8 21 2010 JR 3 2010 a 3 27 JR JR 2010 b 3 27 JR 3 27 2013 9 24 2011 a 5 15 2011 b 11 25 2011 c 6 26 2011 d 11 26 2011 e 11 25 2012 2 23 2013 9 30
Experimental study about the judgement of Japanese grand juror
Results of simulation prosecutorial examination for university students
Yuko Yamasaki
Abstract: The decision of the Committees for the Inquest of Prosecution, which is Japanese grand jury, has teeth in 2009 and eight cases were brought charge as of March 28, 2015. But among these cases only two ones were convicted in court. Why the innocent percentage in the cases which were indicted by Japanese grand jury was larger than that in the cases which were indicted by prosecutors The reason might be due to a difference in their recognition to the criteria for the indictment.
In this study, we took two cases which were prosecuted by the Committees for the Inquest of
Prosecution and make a study on university students judgement about the prosecution. It revealed that they tend to make consideration adequately about the size of damage, possibility that a truth is elucidated by a trial, and the victim's emotional request for a harsh penalty, and that they apt to give little thought about the law. And it indicated that their judgment about indictment or not was little based on their degree of conviction about a suspect s guilty. Furthermore, the participant's judgement of whether prosecution or not depended on the degree how they judged from "legal point of view", but their judgment was not the same as the prosecutor s one.
