Juror Decision Making and Euthanasia: Exploring the Role of Jury Nullification, Manner of Death, and Defendant-Decedent Relationship.

euthanasia jury decision-making jury nullification

Journal

Psychological reports
ISSN: 1558-691X
Titre abrégé: Psychol Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376475

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Historique:
pubmed: 29 4 2022
medline: 29 4 2022
entrez: 28 4 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

In cases of euthanasia, determinations of guilt may be influenced by legal and extra-legal factors. This study explores the role that nullification instructions play in juror decision making. A defendant may be viewed as less culpable if the act was done out of mercy and jury nullification may occur as a result. We anticipated that these determinations may be influenced by the manner of death and the relational distance between the defendant and the decedent. It is unknown how euthanasia is viewed when it is performed by a physician compared to a family member or friend. To answer these questions, participants acted as mock jurors in a euthanasia case. The descriptions of the case varied by the presence of nullification instructions, the manner of death, and the defendant's relationship to the decedent. The results revealed significant effects of method of euthanasia and the type of defendant on juror verdicts. Jurors were most likely to acquit in a case that provided nullification instructions and involved a spouse using lethal injection for euthanasia. This finding suggests that different circumstances of a euthanasia case will affect jurors' propensity to focus on personal sympathies and interpretations. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35484479
doi: 10.1177/00332941221093244
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

3052-3070

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Auteurs

Jason D Scott (JD)

Department of Criminal Justice, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA.

Daniel Bell (D)

Department of Psychology, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA.

Brian Barry (B)

Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA.

John E Edlund (JE)

Department of Psychology, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA.

Classifications MeSH