Virtual reality headsets could help juries issue more accurate verdicts, according to study shows

Virtual reality (VR) games and cinema are already popular with technology enthusiasts for the kind of experience they offer. Imagine the same technology reaching the courtrooms, helping jurors make a better call or pronounce a more accurate verdict. Looks like that day isn’t too far away. A team of investigators, legal professionals, police and forensics have explored the idea and the results are encouraging.

A spatial knowledge of a jury can influence a correct verdict (either a traffic accident or a murder case). However, the judgment does not always prove to be correct despite all the expertise and expertise. But a study – “Bringing the Jury to the Crime Scene: Memory and Decision Making in a Simulated Crime Scene” – from the University of South Australia has shown overwhelming evidence supporting the use of reality technology virtual in the halls of the room and help the jurors to make the right decision. According to the team, a traffic accident or homicide case is made effective in front of their eyes through a simulation.

VR technology, however, has previously been used in a courtroom. In 2019, the Bavarian State Criminal Office simulated an interactive scene of the famous Auschwitz concentration camp to help the prosecution case in a war crimes trial.

3D headphones in courtrooms?

For the purposes of the study, a team of members from a wide range of fields, including forensics, law and security, simulated a success scene. They reconstructed the events with a laser scanner and compared judgments between “jurors” using 3D headphones and those that depended only on the photographs in the scene. The results, according to the team, were encouraging, as they demonstrated “spatial accuracy and more consistent verdicts” in the cases of 30 jurors who participated in the study.

Not only that, it was found that participants who used the 3D headphones were 9.5 times more likely to choose the same verdict, “Death by Dangerous Driving,” compared to the group that relied entirely on photographs. Others, according to the experiment, were divided between 47 and 53 between careless driving and dangerous driving.

In a statement, Dr Andrew Cunningham, of the Research Center for Interactive and Virtual Environments at the University of South Australia, said VR technology also required significantly less effort compared to photographs to gather the sequence of ‘Events.

“Participants who were immersed in the scene were more likely to correctly remember the location of the car in relation to the victim at the time of the accident, while it was difficult for people to visualize the scene from images. fixed, “said Dr. Cunningham.

Dr. Carolin Reichherzer, principal investigator, said site visits were still the gold standard in providing jurors with the most realistic impression of the scene, but added that they also had their drawbacks. “They’re expensive, especially in remote places, and in some cases, the place itself has changed, making accurate visualization impossible,” Dr. Reichherzer said.

Source link

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *