Racial differences are apparent to most individuals throughout our society today and those differences have been known to influence people’s judgment about racial minorities. These influences do not cease to exist when an individual is sitting inside the courtroom and race has been no stranger to the impact the jury decision. Racial bias inside the courtroom is not new nor is it a rare occurrence and have at times played a large part in jury deliberations. Jurors are supposed to be unbiased and rational individuals with a non-biased opinion on the case presented before them. However, collective evidence shows that the notion that jury members are always rational and non-biased to be completely false. This is believed to be mostly in part to an individual’s environmental influences. If an individual has grown up in an environment where there is a strong presence of racism against a specific community of people it would be difficult for this person to show an objective opinion towards another person of a different race. Those kinds of environmental influences can strongly affect a person’s decision when present upon a jury panel. It is even to be thought that an individual’s religious environment may have an influence upon their jury making decisions. One of the concerns in the jury selection process is that even though jurors are supposed to be rational persons whom wait until all evidence is present to make an informed decision; this process does not include the facts of human decision making. Through this research a story model was created to display the decision making process (Malavanti, Johnson, Rowatt & Weaver, 2012). According to the story model constructed jurors will use the evidence presented to them and create their own narrative story in order to explain their initial impressions of the situation. (Malavanti, Johnson, Rowatt & Weaver, 2012). After the juror presents themselves with their own replication of events he or she then deliberates on an alternative verdicts as a means to come to a conclusion upon the basis of their narratives. Lastly the juror determines the best fit between their narrative and the ending result they have chosen. When an individual possesses a racial bias this will impact their decision based upon their own personal decision making process throughout the trial proceedings. The idea of having a jury is generated by the notion that using a group of individuals to deliberate over a specific topic (polling) will decrease the bias factor .and we assume that there will be less error when a group of persons are working together. For example if an individual possesses a bias against Hispanic persons, they would be more likely to shoot an armed Hispanic individual before shooting an armed individual of another race. This could be the same when an individual of Hispanic origin is being tried of a crime that requires a jury of peers to deliberate upon their case; if the man on trial shot and killed a lady inside a laundry mat, and was Hispanic he would be deemed guilty based upon a jurors bias against Hispanic persons. Through education on juror bias towards race we can help alleviate some of the stressors that cause juror bias, however there are other ways in which to help eliminate juror bias in the courtroom. During selection for jury there is a questionnaire known as the Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire (Malavanti, Johnson, Rowatt, & Weaver, 2012) is used to measure the racial attitudes of jurors before the selection process has been finalized. These questions are then used to collect statistical information based upon the answers of the jurors. In collecting this data jurors that are likely to convict an individual based upon racial bias can be weeded out. However an individuals guided thought process , or rather their decision making process; according to Nobel Prize award recipient and psychologist Daniel Kahneman (Malavanti, Johnson, Rowatt, & Weaver, 2012), our decision making process is guided by two systems. System one is characterized by our unconscious decisions and are thoughts of no effort, the second system is characterized by our deliberate thought process in which we put a long and well-constructed effort into the conclusion we reach. Kahneman also discovered that while we would like to believe jurors are most consciously using their efforts towards making an informed decision on the case at hand; in fact they are most likely to play upon the efforts of the first system of thinking to conclude the outcome of their decision in the courtroom. Alongside race it is believed that religion can pose an influence on the decision making processes jurors. This has not often been a concern inside the courtroom and racial bias has been the predominate concern among bias in the courtroom, however there are other environmental factors that we must not ignore, such as religion. We as humans take our belief systems to heart on a very personal level and can easily become offended when those beliefs and ideals are challenged. This is no different inside the courtroom. When a case inside the courtroom is one in which an individual or individuals of non-Christian groups are affiliated with those cases, those with very strong religious ties are more likely to convict those persons based upon the fact of their strong rooted religious beliefs and ideals. Throughout our society today we have made great strides to overcome racial bias and to better the relationships among the melting pot that is our society. Even with the strides we have made within our society to relinquish these racial divides the fact still remains that racial prejudice still presides today. Juror bias is a more common but less subtle cue of racism within our society, but demands the same attentions as any other racially biased situation. It is imperative to work within the realm of conscious efforts to prevent these influences inside the courtroom that could wrongly convict an individual. However being able to identify these biases is not along the same page as preventing them from happening and it is extremely perilous to completely put an end to racial prejudice and biases inside the courtroom.

REFERENCES: * Malavanti, Johnson, Rowatt, & Weaver. (May 29, 2012). Subtle Contextual Influences on Racial Bias in the Courtroom. Retrieved on February 8, 2015 from http://www.thejuryexpert.com