Expert Testimony Pertaining to Battered Woman Syndrome: Its Impact on Jurors' Decisions

Participants (N = 200) were presented with a criminal homicide trial involving a battered woman who had killed her abuser. Within the trial, both the response history (passive, active) and presence of expert testimony pertaining to battered woman syndrome (present, absent) were systematically varied. As well, half of the participants in each of these conditions were provided with a nullification instruction informing them that they were free to disregard the law and acquit should a strict application of the law result in an unjust verdict. Results indicated that, compared to the passive response condition, the mock jurors were no less receptive to the expert testimony in the active response condition. The impact of the testimony on participants' verdicts, however, was moderated by the nullification instruction. That is, although the presence of the testimony did result in greater verdict leniency, this only occurred when the mock jurors had been released from a strict application of the law. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Police Responses to Sexual Assault Complaints: The Role of Perpetrator/Complainant Intoxication

This study explored the impact of victim and perpetrator alcohol consumption on police officers' evaluations of an alleged sexual assault and their reported likelihood of charging the perpetrator. Two hundred and twelve police officers were presented with a vignette depicting an acquaintance rape in which the beverage consumption (beer, cola) of both the victim and perpetrator was systematically varied. Results indicated that the officers' perceptions of the complainant's intoxication level, as well as the gender of the officer, influenced officers' evaluations of the alleged sexual assault. The more intoxicated the complainant was perceived to be, the more negatively she was viewed. Female police officers evaluated the victim more favorably than male officers. The only factors related to the officers' likelihood of charging the perpetrator, however, involved their assessment of the complainant's credibility and their perception of the likelihood that the perpetrator would be found guilty in a court of law.     

The Impact of Prejudice Screening Procedures on Racial Bias in the Courtroom

The current study examines the impact of the challenge for cause procedure and its effectiveness in curbing racial prejudice in trials involving Black defendants. Participants were provided with a trial summary of a defendant charged with either drug trafficking or embezzlement. The race of the defendant was either White or Black, with participants in the Black defendant condition receiving (prior to the trial presentation) either no challenge, a close-ended standard challenge, or a modified reflective pretrial questioning strategy. Overall, the results revealed an anti-Black bias in judgments. While the closed ended challenge did little to reduce this bias, the reflective format demonstrated a reduction in racial bias. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.

The impact of battered woman syndrome evidence on jury decision processes

The impact of battered woman syndrome testimony on jury decision processes in trials of battered women who kill their abusers was investigated in two separate studies. It was hypothesized that the presence of the testimony would influence jurors' verdicts via its mediating effect on the jurors' interpretations of the battered woman's beliefs and actions and that its impact would vary as a function of the degree to which it was linked to the woman on trial. In Experiment I, subjects read a homicide trial involving a battered woman who had killed her husband. They received either no expert testimony (control), expert testimony presenting general research findings on the battered woman syndrome (general expert), or expert testimony in which the expert supplemented the general information with an opinion that the defendant fit the syndrome (specific expert). The presence of the specific expert, compared to the control, led to interpretations that were more consistent with the woman's account of what occurred; these interpretations, in turn, were related to more lenient verdicts. Experiment 2 investigated the effects of the testimony on small groups of deliberating jurors. Compared to the control condition, a moderate shift in verdicts from murder to manslaughter was found in both expert conditions. Content analyses of the deliberations, as well as postdeliberation judgments, indicated that the presence of the testimony led to interpretations that were more favorable to the battered woman's claim of self-defense.Preparation of this research, was supported in part by Fellowships from the Social Sciences & Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Law and Social Science Program of Northwestern University. I. wish to thank Neil Vidmar and James Olson for their invaluable advice throughout all stages of the research, as well as Shari Diamond, Tom Tyler, Richard Lalonde, and Doug McCann for their helpful comments, on earlier drafts of the article. For their diligence and patience in coding the data, I would like to thank Cindi Chandler and Audi Grant.