User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6

  1. #1
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default U Pick the Jury's MBII type

    Hypothetical Scenario: you are the defense attorney on a criminal case. Your client is accused of a felony battery because when his family was being attacked by the “victims” he found himself involved in the altercation. His friend stabbed one of the victims, and defendant’s mother was stabbed during the altercation presumably by one of the “victims” the government are charging him as an accessory to felony battery. 2 main issues
    a) guilt by reasonable doubt against the defendant and
    b) affirmative defense of defense of self/others (which would (only “if a)” was proven)

    Question if you could choose the ideal MBII make up of the jury what would it be. Preferably innocence but a hung jury (with a majority in favor of not guilty verdict) could also seen to be as a lesser “success”.

  2. #2
    Nips away your dignity Fluffywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,422

    Default

    I personally am against juries in the first place. The Netherlands also doesn't have such a system.

    In the UK every citizen can be called to jury, and although within reason and law, they do have an important voice. Brr.

    If I was to be able to choose the type of the jury, I'd go for ENTP's. Although more importantly. I'd want them to be intelligent and smart. In other words. I'd rather have some smart whatevers's then a bunch of dimwitted ENTP's.

    edit: Oh, and reason why ENTP's is that I would trust Ne-Ti the most in such situations. Potentially capable of seeing all the angles and weighing everything properly.
    ~Self-depricating Megalomaniacal Superwolf

  3. #3
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    T definately, F's are far too easily swayed by emotional outbursts and sensationalism, rather than evidence. Presenting a "THINK OF THE CHILDREN ZOMG!" outlandish scenario which has no relevance to the case has too high a chance of working with these. From actually taking a law class though, I've learned that these are the types that lawyers TRY to stack the juries with, because people who think about the facts of the case are the last people yeu want on a jury from both the defendant and the prosecutor's side.


    P's are the next preferrential choice, as they are more likely to be able to see things from the perspective laid out by law; if they are given exacting standards stating 'this is the law this must be met for this charge to hold true' they will tend to take that into account. A J is more likely to impose their own personal beliefs and be less capable of seeing it from the law's perspective, meaning yeu could be judged by something OTHER than the law, specifically, judged by the morals of the jury. Most lawyers also prefer J's, but only if they happen to have the morals that they want; a prosecutor wants their J's to have morals which agree that the defendant's guilty to their morals, regardless of whot the law states, the defendant prefers J's who will be sympathetic regardless of whether guilty or not. There's also the matter that J's are more likely to stick to the first argument that makes sense to them, and will require far more proof to change their mind after that point, and since the prosecution goes first... it wouldn't be useful in this scenario. Either way, P's are rarely preferred, even though they should be.

    E would be my next preferance; they are more likely to be thinking of things as they're being said, processing information as it comes, whereas an I will generally prefer to be given time to view everything alone, without interruptions, and make a deliberation after having had time to think carefully. The sensory overload from the two sides bickering back and forth, especially with some of the very underhanded methods that lawyers use, would just interfere too much with the I's ability to process the information as it comes.

    Lastly, I'm not sure about my final choice. The S can more readily absorb large amounts of physical evidence and data, and correlate them better. If the prosecution provided evidence that didn't make sense, and the defense pointed that out, the S would be far more likely to be able to understand that. On the other hand, the N would be more likely able to follow leaps of logic, where theories come into play and plausible explainations run free, and are a massively important part of a case... I think the S would be far less likely to go with something "that makes sense" though, if there wasn't enough evidence to back it up... and may in fact go with a far less plausible explaination just because there's slightly more evidence to support it, even if it's circumstantial. In this case, the N may be preferable, because they would be more likely to enforce the "beyond a reasonable doubt" expectation that must be held, and the S would be more likely to go with "reasonable doubt but it has evidence even if it doesn't make sense". So I guess I'd probably have to go with N.



    So... I guess I'd prefer to be judged by my peers. ENTP's. But as fluffywolfie said, it'd be better to have a group of intelligent non-entp's than a group of retarded ENTP's. Intelligence allows one to overcome inherent drawbacks and rise past yeur basic instincts, to be more than yeu are. Being on a jury would be extrenuous circumstances, which would best bring out said intelligence. Hopefully.

  4. #4
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Yes it sounds like in this scenario one would definitely want some ENTPs for the defense. I think they would more likely than not hold the prosecution to their burden or otherwise look on the affirmative defenses relatively fairly.

    At the same time would too many or risking an ENTP as a foreperson cause some risk?

    Likely there will be some DNA testing but also there is likely a lot of blood splashed around too.

    I think Js can as a rule be too pro prosecution. Especially SJs although I would want at least a couple of Ss on to view the crime scene at least via pictures/video preferably a live jury tour to the site.
    I think also at least a couple of Fs because the accused is young and his mother was stabbed in the incident (also lets say their were children in the house too). At least one FJ....I am kinda back and forth on INTJ (I wouldn’t mind if their were two but one makes me concerned they could highjack the jury. (thus lower the odd because it will be closer to one opinion than twelve separate ones on what is “reasonable doubt” although I think they may be good on the affirmative defense.

  5. #5
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    At the same time would too many or risking an ENTP as a foreperson cause some risk?

    Likely there will be some DNA testing but also there is likely a lot of blood splashed around too.
    First off, this is true, ENTP's in large numbers... well it's never been done. We kind of hope that such horror never occurs. The world may not be able to survive the carnage wrought. Regardless, the crime that's being placed on trial would be the least of anyone's worries by the end of it.


    Secondly, DNA testing is very rare, and would not be used in this situation, regardless of whot that crap wannabe CSI says. If it's obvious these people were involved, and it's obvious that they were there, and this is not being debated, then DNA evidence has no value in the case whotsoever, and would be worthless, but highly expencive and time consuming to process. It doesn't happen overnight, it takes months, and it only prooves that someone was LIKELY there within a certain range.

    Blood splatter analysis would be far more likely to be used to determine the validity of the charges, as to who struck first and so on.

  6. #6
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Very good points Kat. Lets also say their were children present from both side in the victims side (on the street/in a car) as well as in the perpetrators house. Lets say one of the victims girlfriend got a punch in the mouth. Lets say when the police first came both sides were pretty hush, hush. What also if the victims admitted to drinking and smoking pot (but not that much). Victims also young early 20 where defendant and codefendant is about the same age and defendant's parents both got punched (as well as defendant’s mother getting stabbed in the arm). Victim cut multiple times in neck and body area.

Similar Threads

  1. The Lipson-Shiu Corporate Type Test
    By Bear Warp in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 09-13-2012, 11:10 PM
  2. "The Sandman" 7 Endless types
    By nightwatcher in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-26-2008, 03:55 AM
  3. The Verdict on My Type
    By MerkW in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 01-22-2008, 11:15 AM
  4. Brad 'The Bachelor' Womack's type
    By RDF in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-05-2007, 02:51 PM
  5. The natural order of "Types"
    By Veneti in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-18-2007, 01:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO