Silvia Mazzula's Jury Bias

In the article, Jury Bias: Can You Argue the Facts When Race Enters the Mix, the author Silvia L. Mazzula tells us the truth that sometimes decisions from jurors are based on more than just facts. They are likely to be influenced by race, even though they don’t really notice that. The author firstly puts forward some public’s controversy about this kind of unfairness. The whole article is based on a study, in this study, we can see the jury bias does exist. Since we notice that situation, we need to try our best to improve racism through effective ways. When writing this article, the author takes many risks. A writer that takes a risk, is a writer that is not afraid of expressing his/her opinions that are controversial and sensitive. In the article, the author Silva firstly states the foundation of the United States’ justice system is to create a just and fair trial, so only “relevant” facts can be considered in the courtroom. However, she puts a different fact that jury bias does exist in the courtroom against above content, which is controversial to the public, so we can learn about that the author is taking risks to write this article. When the author is writing this paper, she is taking personal risk firstly. Let’s talk about Silvia. The author, a native of Uruguay, Silvia L. Mazzula, Ph.D., NCC, LPC, earned her doctorate in Counseling Psychology from Columbia University and completed her formal clinical training at the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey-UBHC Newark Campus. Her clinical interests focus on working with underserved and underrepresented populations. Dr. Mazzula’s research interests focus primarily on the intersection of racial/cultural attitudes and mental health, Latino/a psychology, and treatment service utilization. Currently, she is a Research Fellow at Columbia University/New York State Psychiatric Institute, a National Certified Counselor and Licensed Professional Counselor in New Jersey. Dr. Mazzula is also the President-Elect for the Latino Psychological Association of New Jersey and a member of the American Psychological Association, American Counseling Association, and National Latino Psychological Association. From her experience, we can say she is very professional in the field of this kind of study. However, we notice that her work focus on the Latino and other minority racial groups. The public may think she gives favoritism on the minority, so Whites may have dissatisfaction with the writer, because they think in that way. This article is posted on the Psychology Benefits Society, is a blog from the APA Public Interest Directorate. APA is American Psychological Association is a scientific and professional organization that represents psychologists in the United States. Due to that, many professors will view this article and judge its professionality, so the writer is taking personal risk. She has to make sure this article can reach the high level of APA. Social risk is also obvious. …show more content…
Silvia found that not all judges are completely fair from her social network site, “over the past several months, my Twitter and Facebook newsfeeds have overflowed with posts about race and the justice system following grand jury rulings to not indict in the cases involving police killings of unarmed Black men.” (Silvia) We can see that the case of police killings of unarmed Black men has been discussing by the public for a long time. Silvia also mentions that Blacks are treated the worst in criminal and civil cases, and some studies show jurors’ biases about race may have something to do with their verdict, even many researchers don’t quite agree. Obviously, it’s a sensitive and controversial topic. It’s related to public concern about the justice system and racism. Due to that, Silvia takes social risk when she is writing this article. Racism is always a sensitive topic in the society, it seems that racism always exists and people notice that, but they don’t want to mention it. The public may say that she is trying to challenge the authority of the United States justice system since there exists injustice. In Silvia’s standpoint, she just wants to let the kind of injustice can be paid more attention by the public, even though these jurors may feel offensive. Many readers may focus on professional risk. The most