Drug Deals and Jury Wheels: Explaining Systematic Sampling in Court

• Activity Number: 488
• Type: Invited
• Date/Time: Wednesday, August 4, 2010 : 10:30 AM to 12:20 PM
• Sponsor: Committee on Law and Justice Statistics
• Author(s): George Cobb*+
• Companies: Mt. Holyoke College

Abstract

In the case of US v Shine et al., in Burlington, Vermont, I was retained by federal attorneys who were prosecuting a dozen accused drug dealers, all of them members of racial minorities. A demographer on the defense team claimed that the citizens who served on the indicting grand juries had been chosen using a method - systematic random sampling from a doubly alphabetized list -- that was racially biased, and therefore in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The Honorable William K. Sessions III -- presiding judge in this consolidated bench hearing -- was impressively well prepared and equally astute in his questioning. In my talk, I'll first describe Vermont's jury selection method, then summarize one narrow set of statistical issues related to systematic random sampling that figured in the hearing, the ways in which I was able to address the concerns of Judge Sessions, and the main way in which, according to the Judge's judgment -- and my own -- I failed to address his concerns, even though, in the cold light of hindsight, I should have been able to do better.