Diane Warling, Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto.
The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes†
Version of Record online: 8 JAN 2003
Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law
Special Issue: Disability, Public Policy, and Technology.
Volume 21, Issue 1, pages 63–82, January/February 2003
How to Cite
Warling, D. and Peterson-Badali, M. (2003), The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes. Behav. Sci. Law, 21: 63–82. doi: 10.1002/bsl.517
This paper is based on Diane Warling's doctoral dissertation submitted to the Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. Portions of the data included in this research were presented at the First Biennial Meeting of the European Association of Psychology and Law/American Psychology–Law Society in July 1999, and published in Roesch, R., Corrado, R. R., and Dempster, R. (2001). Psychology in the courts: International advances in knowledge. New York: Routledge.
The authors wish to thank Jonathan Freedman, Esther Geva, Joanna Henderson and Carol Root for their helpful suggestions on earlier drafts of this manuscript, and Ron Roesch for his editorial comments on an earlier related manuscript.
- Issue online: 5 FEB 2003
- Version of Record online: 8 JAN 2003
With the progression to more adult-like policies and procedures for youth in the justice system, the right to a jury trial has been extended to young offenders. These youth would not be tried by a jury of their peers, however, but by a jury of adults. The concern is that adult jurors may hold negative attitudes about youth that might influence their decision making in a case involving a young defendant. Two studies examined whether and under what conditions defendant's age affects jurors' decisions about the guilt and sentencing of an accused. In study 1, data were gathered from two samples of jury eligible adults: one university sample and one public sample. Mock jurors read written transcripts of a trial involving a defendant who was presented as either 13, 17, or 25 years of age. Results indicated that the defendant's age had no effect on mock jurors' verdict or their ratings of defendant guilt. However, younger defendants were granted shorter sentences than the adult defendants. In study 2, mock jurors read the same trial presented in study 1 but were asked to deliberate about the case and render group verdicts. These group verdicts did not differ significantly by defendant's age. Age-related themes that emerged from group deliberations were identified, and results indicated that age tended to be used as a mitigating factor in favor of youth rather than against them. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for youth justice policy and practice. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.