Author:
Yamamoto Susan,Maeder Evelyn M.
Abstract
In insanity cases, although the defendant's eventual punishment is legally irrelevant to the jury's decision, it may be psychologically relevant. In this three-part mixed-methods study, Canadian jury eligible participants (N = 83) read a fictional murder case involving an insanity claim, then took part in 45-min deliberations. Findings showed that mock jurors who were generally favourable towards punishment had a lower frequency of utterances that supported the Defence's case. A qualitative description of keyword flagged utterances also demonstrated that mock jurors relied on moral intuitions about authority, harm, and fairness in justifying their positions. These findings may have application in crafting effective Judge's instructions and lawyer's opening statements.
Reference55 articles.
1. Understanding Restorative Justice Practice Within the Aboriginal Context. Correctional Service Canada
AchtenbergM.
2015
2. Public beliefs about and attitudes towards people with mental illness: a review of population studies;Angermeyer;Acta Psychiatr. Scand.,2006
3. The mismeasure of morals: Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas;Bartels;Cognition,2011
4. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation;Bentham,2006
5. An empirical investigation of insanity defense attitudes: exploring factors related to bias;Bloechl;Int. J. Law Psychiatry,2007
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献