FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
What geographies are covered by JM?
Currently we are offering our full suite of services in the 62 Counties of New York State. This includes approximately 30,000 statistically random survey respondents to our initial benchmark survey from which we can score almost every eligible jury member on several types of models. Since this is just our initial state, we will be rolling out additional states and counties as needed.
We do offer a standard jury profile report for nearly all potential jurors in 3,141 counties – totaling 100% nationwide coverage. These data are compiled from multiple public and private consumer records sources.
Additionally we can provide custom polling, analytics (modeling) and reports in any jurisdiction in the U.S., given enough time to deliver the work prior to Voir Dire (at least 6-8 weeks).
What types of questions or models have you created and how can you know if a model is predictive?
Great question Gary. What we know coming out of our benchmark New York survey is that some models work and show a high predictability (as measured by x in the statistical realm) while some we hoped would work are only average but not highly predictive – and yes indeed some just outright failed.
For now we are offering a series of the highest predictive models dealing with Medical Malpractice, Product and Personal Liability and Award Amount/Damages. We are striving for continual improvement so we will improve as we roll out future models to pattern Voir Dire questions as well as IPIP personality series questions related to Assertiveness, Sympathy etc. Those that failed are not worth mentioning but we will continue to build out our library of successful model questions (yhose over > x% CI etc).
Also noteworthy is our entire methodology will be under peer review by 2 prominent academics testing the validity of our models. We have also met with many other judges, attorneys, statistical consulting firms and law professors testing out our method over the past few years prior to our initial product launch in the Summer of 2016.
Are there any jurisdictional restrictions or court access issues surrounding the JM product?
Generally speaking – no. The data reports you will be using are built on the most currently available public or licensed data. The data are completely legal to use for your research and analysis. We are compliant with all regulations and restrictions related to individual name and address data.
Case law (and ABA Guidelines) now refer to the necessity of permitting some scope of research to assist in Voir Dire our goal is to provide these data in the most
Most courts provide WiFi with ample connectivity to use case management and research systems like JM. If there is an issue or doubt about connecting to our site or creating reports on the spot, we can work with you to figure out a way to deliver the data you need.
How is JM different from other legal research tools?
We are different because no other data/research company delivers what we can provide. In the era of “Big Data” anyone can say they are a data shop. We own and maintain over 185,000,000 individual and household records which are updated at least 4 times a year. We are not just data vendors or licensed resellers. We are data scientists well versed in gathering prevailing public opinion, analyzing these data – and creating advanced code (algorithms) to extract the data from opinion polls (surveys) and score every potential juror As If they had taken the survey as well. So our foundation is built on an expertise in owning and maintaining massive databases of individual/household “demographics, lifestyles, hobbies, interests, expenditures, donations, ideologies and political beliefs”.
We develop and conduct surveys to measure the public attitudes toward case scenarios, the justice system, political ideology, Voir Dire questions and recognized personality scale indicators. And unlike typical name lookup services, we work with you to make sure you get relevant and insightful “bright” data – not just reams of data for you to review and make some kind of decision with. We provide only the data you want and need. And those names can be “scored and ranked” based on one or a combination of available models (Medical Malpractice, Liability, Damage, etc.)
Our data are delivered in one of several reports that are easy to use and understand.
In conclusion – no other firm offers what JM can deliver. Statistically combine massive amounts of individual and household data with prevailing public opinion and deliver an easy to use report on the venires degree of favorability toward a specific question.
Could JM users/clients be criticized by the (Judge, Court, Opposing Council, Media or specific Jurors) for using an individual reference tool to research and sort the venire?
Possibly – it depends. Not all Judges/Courts/Juries are alike. Venire names are made available to counsel or their litigation team at different times depending on the case or the venue.
What we do know is that ever since the earliest times Juries have been used – trial participants have tried to understand – even know the jurors as best they can. Over time many methods have been used to try and build or select a non biased, representative jury of one’s peers – both by the courts creating the jury wheel and by the attorneys use of juror questionnaires to better understand that days participants. Trial consultants are widely used in high profile cases and often participate directly in jury selection.
It’s a common practice in litigation to conduct “community analysis” on prevailing case knowledge and attitudes (those involved in politics call it a public opinion survey or “Poll”). Also commonly used are the various name lookup/background services offered my many companies. Even social media sites are being used (we don’t offer that service). To date no one entity has successfully combined these efforts in one singular offering.
Our basic understanding is that no community analysis or polling be conducted within a certain number of weeks or months preceding jury selection so as not to introduce any bias and additionally every effort is made to not contact any trial participants with the survey questionnaire.
We have also developed our terms of use and privacy policy with these concerns in mind and in compliance with all regulations related to personal information sharing. We do not resell any data and make every effort to secure the data content. If a case requires specific instructions for the use of individually identifying data, we will comply.
Isn’t this the same as hiring a trial consultant?
Not exactly, but it could help in your trial strategy regardless if you use a regular consultant or not. The JM data and analysis are machine generated. We use computer code and algorithms rather than human instinct or perceptions. JM uses data science not clinical psychology. We believe that combining the two may yield great results should your case require that level of detail.