The impact of abuse allegations in perceiving parricide in the courtroom

Abstract

One hundred and seventy five undergraduates (105 females) read a fictional criminal trial summary of a parricide case in which the juvenile defendant alleged sexual abuse or physical abuse or did not allege abuse. An allegation of either type of abuse led to a greater likelihood of a manslaughter conviction than a murder conviction and greater pro-child ratings (e.g., sympathy toward the defendant) compared to no abuse allegations. Specific evaluations of the defendant mediated the verdict results. In addition, there was no support for the claim that perceptions are more heinous for sexual abuse than physical abuse allegations and only limited support that perceptions for this type of case result in women being more pro-child defendant than men. The discussion focuses on how abuse allegations impact jurors' decision-making processes in parricide cases.

Keywords:

• parricide
• patricide
• child sexual abuse
• child physical abuse
• juror decision making

Notes

1. All analyses present the data combined across samples (paper and pencil vs. online). We examined if the findings differed by sample and found no differences for verdict results. The results for the rating variables differed primarily for the sexual abuse history condition (higher mean Negative Affect Toward Victim ratings and lower mean Defendant's Cognitive Reaction ratings for the online sample) and the no abuse history condition (lower mean Defendant Instability ratings and higher Defendant's Cognitive Reaction ratings for the online sample), but these differences did not change the interpretation of the data. Details of this analysis are available upon request.