Affidavit of Neil Vidmar
| Author | David M. Tanovich; David Paciocco; Steven Skurka |
| Pages | 243-272 |
A
P
P I;
N
D
1 X
II
AFHDAVIT
OF
NEIL
VIDMAR
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COURT
OF
JUSTICE
(CENTRAL
WEST
REGION)
HER
MAJESTY
THE
QUEEN
and
Robert
Scott
Musson
AFFIDAVIT
OF
NEIL
(JOSEPH)
VIDMAR
SWORN
THE 20 DAY OF
APRIL, 1995
Respondent
Applicant
I,
Neil (Joseph)
Vidmar,
of the
City
of
Chapel Hill,
in the
County
of
Orange,
North
Carolina, hereby MAKE
OATH
AND
1.
I am a
Canadian citizen holding
the
position
of
Profes-
sor of
Social Science
and Law in the
Duke University School
of
Law,
Durham, NC., U.S.A.;
I
also hold
a
cross-appointment
in the
Duke Univer-
sity
Department
of
Psychology (Social
and
Health Sciences).
243
244
JURY
SELECTION
IN
CRIMINAL
TRIALS
2.
I was
asked
by Mr.
David
Porter,
legal counsel
for Dr.
Robert Scott
Musson,
to
assess
the
circumstances surrounding
the
charges
against
Dr.
Musson
and to
offer
my
professional opinion
as to
whether there
are
reasonable grounds
to
believe that some
of the
veniremen called
as
potential jurors
for Dr.
Musson's
trial might
not be
impartial
as to his
guilt
or
innocence. Additionally,
if I did
reach
a
conclusion that there
are
reasonable
grounds
for
such
a
belief concern,
Mr.
Porter
asked
me to
draw upon
my
knowledge
of and
experience with
the
challenge
for
cause process
in
Canada
as
well
as my
training
as a
social psychologist
to
offer
the
Court
some possi-
ble
questions
for a
challenge
for
cause
of
prospective jurors summoned
for
this
case.
OVERVIEW
3.
After
undertaking research
on the
background
and
con-
text
of R. v.
Musson,
it is my
professional opinion that there
is a
reasonable
probability
that
some veniremen called
for
jury duty from
the
Central
West
Region,
will
hold opinions
and
beliefs
that will preclude them
from
being
fair
and
impartial jurors
in the
case
of R. v.
Musson.
After
summarizing
my
cre-
dentials
relevant
to
determination
of my
expertise
on the
issue
of
pre-trial
publicity
and
jury behavior, including research
and
testimony
on the
subject
in
the
provinces
of
Ontario,
British Columbia, Newfoundland
and
Prince
Edward
Island,
I
will explain
in
detail
the
reasons behind
my
opinion
and
offer
the
Court
some questions that
can be
asked
of
prospective jurors
in a
challenge
for
cause, along with
an
explanation
of
why,
in my
professional
opinion,
I
believe that they
are
appropriate.
PROFESSIONAL
BACKGROUND
AND
QUALIFICATIONS
4. I
received
a
B.A. from MacMurray
College,
Jackson-
ville,
111.
in
1962
and a
M.A.
in
1965
and
Ph.D.
in
Psychology
in
1967 (spe-
cializing
in
social psychology)
from
the
University
of
Illinois, Champaign.
Further information about
my
education
and
credentials enumerated below
is
contained
in my
curriculum vitae which
is
attached
to
this
affidavit
and
marked
as
Exhibit
A.
5.
In
1967,
I
accepted
a
professorship
in the
Department
of
Psychology
at the
University
of
Western Ontario
and
held that position
until
I
resigned
to
take
my
present position
at
Duke
Law
School
in
1991.
I
attended
Yale
Law
School
as a
Russell Sage Resident
in Law in
1973-1974
and
continued
the
study
of law as a
Fellow
at the
Battelle
Seattle
Research
Center
in
1975-1976.
In
1979
I was
cross-appointed with
the
School
of Law
at
the
University
of
Western Ontario where
I
taught classes that included
To continue reading
Request your trial