Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice and Behavior
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by POULSON, R. L.
Right arrow Articles by BRONDINO, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Factors That Discriminate among Mock Jurors' Verdict Selections

Impact of the Guilty but Mentally Ill Verdict Option

RONALD L. POULSON

East Carolina University

KARL L. WUENSCH

East Carolina University

MICHAEL J. BRONDINO

University of South Carolina

A mock insanity defense trial was presented to 327 college students who were then asked to render a verdict under two conditions: with and without the "guilty but mentally ill" (GBMI) verdict option being available. Among those voting GBMI, two different subgroups were identified. With respect to their attitudes and their evaluation of the evidence, those who voted guilty when the GBMI verdict option was not available were similar to those who voted guilty when the GBMI was available. Those who voted "not guilty by reason of insanity" (NGRI) when the GBMI verdict option was not available were similar to those who voted NGRI when the GBMI verdict was available. Compared to those who would have judged the defendant guilty if the GBMI verdict was unavailable, these jurors were more likely to believe the defendant to be schizophrenic and legally insane, and to believe the defense expert witnesses.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 3, 366-381 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854898025003005
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?