A) Cases are not presented in a random order, B) judges attempt to complete all cases from a given prison before a break is taken, C) the study groups together

A) Cases are not presented in a random order, B) judges attempt to complete all cases from a given prison before a break is taken, C) the study groups together "deferred" and "not granted parole" - it's possible "deferred" cases are pushed to the back of the prison's docket. Also, D) shared representation is common, and in these cases it's possible and likely for the representative (who chooses what order to present his cases to the judge) to present the most promising case first.* How this at all boils down to "hungry judges" and then gets reported as such is basically everything wrong with science reporting (which is to say, almost everything is wrong with science reporting). * Probably oversimplified from http://www.pnas.org/content/108/42/E833.full http://www.pnas.org/content/108/42/E833.full