Richard H. Underwood

Bio: Richard H. Underwood is an academic researcher from University of Kentucky. The author has contributed to research in topics: Professional responsibility & Professional ethics. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 19 publications receiving 39 citations. Previous affiliations of Richard H. Underwood include Pepperdine University.

Can the Jury Disregard that Information? The Use of Suspicion to Reduce the Prejudicial Effects of Pretrial Publicity and Inadmissible Testimony

Abstract: Mock jurors learned incriminating information about a defendant in the context of pretrial publicity (Study 1) or testimony introduced in the trial but ruled inadmissible (Study 2). Despite the judge's instructions that they disregard the information, jurors' verdicts were affected significantly by the information, unless the jurors were made suspicious about the motives underlying the introduction of this information. That is, jurors given reason to be suspicious about why the incriminating information was introduced into the media or the trial offered verdicts that did not differ from those made by jurors who were not exposed to the incriminating information. The potential role of suspicion in weakening the biasing effects of a variety of nonevidentiary factors on jurors' verdicts is discussed, as is the role of suspicion in social-cognitive processes more generally.

The search for truth

Abstract: DR. ULBEL J. JONES'S volume rightly appears series of “Discussion Books”. He never lay ioVn the law, but offers an abundance-perhaps a superabundance-of material designed to set the reader thinking. His aim has been to give an account of the way in which men of science, historians, philosophers, artists, poets, moral and religious teachers and others have searched for truth and tried to express it. He admits that some readers may find the treatment too brief, but hopes they may find the book of interest as a conspectus of the whole subject. Indeed the reviewer, after an attentive perusal, has come to regard the book as a handy directory, written by a person of wide sympathies and en cyclopaedic reading, and he proposes to give it a place among his reference books. Here he can only offer a few comments. The chapter on “The Liars in their Lairs” is both diverting and incisive. The author quotes to good effect the philosopher who said, “if you ask me what time is I cannot tell you, but I know what it is if you do not ask me”. It will be news to many that Mussolini founded his morality on the pragmatism of William James. The sections on our habits of labelling and on “the bondage of consistency” are much to the point. The one chapter which the reviewer finds inadequate is that on historical truth, where no account is taken of the positions held by G. M. Trevelyan, J. B. Bury, J. Buchan, and others.In Search of TruthDr.Abel J.JonesBy. (Discussion Books, No. 79.) Pp. 208. (London and Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1945.) 3s. 6d. net.

Dirty tricks of cross-examination: The influence of conjectural evidence on the jury.

Abstract: A mock jury study was conducted to test the hypothesis that perceptions of a witness can be biased by presumptuous cross-examination questions. A total of 105 subjects read a rape trial in which the cross-examiner asked a question that implied something negative about the reputation of either the victim or an expert. Within each condition, the question was met with either a denial, an admission, or an objection from the witness's attorney. Results indicated that although ratings of the victim's credibility were not affected by the presumptuous question, the expert's credibility was significantly diminished—even when the question had elicited a denial or a sustained objection. Conceptual and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Domestic Violence and Systemic Deception in the Family Legal System: A Compelling Case for Truthful Reform

Abstract: I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III TABLE OF CONTENTS IV TABLES OF CASES AND LEGISLATION XI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS XIII

Policies to Overcome Barriers for Renewable Energy Distributed Generation: A Case Study of Utility Structure and Regulatory Regimes in Michigan

Abstract: Because of its environmental damage and now often being the most expensive source for electricity production, coal use is declining throughout the United States. Michigan has no active coal mining and seemingly supportive legislation for distributed generation (DG) and renewable energy (RE) technologies. However, Michigan still derives approximately half of its power production from large centralized coal plants, despite the availability of much lower cost RE DG technologies. To understand this conundrum, this study reviews how Michigan investor owned utilities utilize their political power to perpetuate utility structures that work toward the financial interests of the utilities rather than the best interests of the state's electricity consumers, including other firms and residents. Background is provided covering the concept of DG, the cost savings associated with DG, and utility regulatory regimes at the national, regional, state, and local levels. Recent case studies from specific utility strategies are provided in order to illustrate how Michigan utilities manipulate regulatory regimes via policy misinterpretation to deter or hinder the proliferation of DG in favor of maintaining the existing interests in centralized, fossil fuel-based electrical energy production. The results of this study demonstrate how DG proliferation is hindered by Michigan regulated utilities via the exercise of political power within existing legal and regulatory regimes. This highlights the need to think about how utilities may interpret and implement rules when designing energy legislation and policy to maximize the benefits for consumers and society. Policy recommendations and alternate strategies are provided to help enhance the role of energy policy to improve rather than limit the utilization of RE DG.