1. Guilty, Not Guilty, or Something In-Between
Hannah Phalen, Jessica Salerno, Ashley Waters, Janice Nadler, & Susan Bandes

2. Rare empirical research
Introduction
A third verdict option
Legal theory papers
Rare empirical research
Does a third verdict alter the way jurors interact with emotional evidence?

3. X 2 2 Verdict Options Photographs Hypotheses 2 Verdicts 3 Verdicts
Design and Hypotheses 2 X 2
Verdict Options
2 Verdicts
3 Verdicts
Photographs
None
Color
Hypotheses
In the two verdict condition, gruesome photographs will increase guilty verdicts.
In the three verdict condition, they will not.
Three verdict options will reduce the percentage of guilty verdicts.

4. Mturk (N = 548) Read case stimulus Completed measures
Method
Mturk (N = 548)
35% excluded for failing manipulation checks
51% Women; Age M = 39; 84% White, 7% AA, 6% Asian, 3% Other
Read case stimulus
Presented Gruesome Photograph or no photographs
Completed measures
Verdict
2 or 3 choices
Ratings of Case Strength

5. % of Guilt Verdicts as a Function of Verdict Option and Photographs
B = .96, SE = .54, Wald = 3.12, p = .08
B = –.16, SE = .44, Wald = 0.13, p = .72
B = 1.15, SE = .70, Wald = 2.56, p = .10

6. % of Guilt Verdicts as a Function of Verdict Option and Photographs
B = –0.93, SE = .57, Wald = 2.65, p = .104
B = 0.74, SE = .40, Wald = 3.45, p = .06
B = –0.19, SE = .41, Wald = 0.22, p = .64

7. 2 Verdict Options 3-verdict Options Moderated Mediation
Gruesome Photos
Guilty Verdicts
Prosecution Evidence Strength
Defense Evidence Strength
–.03
2.71**
.06
–1.52**
Prosecution Evidence Strength
.49*
2.62**
Gruesome Photos
Guilty Verdicts
–.12
–1.53**
Defense Evidence Strength
Next, we tested whether we could explain these effects by how participants evaluated the strength of the prosecution and defense evidence strength. To do so, we conducted moderated mediation analyses with Hayes PROCESS macro to test whether gruesome photographs (versus no gruesome photographs) increased guilty verdicts because they motivated mock jurors to rate the prosecution evidence as stronger and the defense evidence as less strong. We tested whether this mediation effect would be stronger when they had a third “not proven” option compared to the standard 2 verdict option. 
*p<.05, **p<.001
Mindirecteffect = –.07, SE = .96, 95% CI [–2.08, 1.70]
Mindirecteffect = 1.66, SE = 1.01, 95% CI [0.14, 3.56]
Mindirecteffect = –.09, SE = .52, 95% CI [–1.15, .91]
Mindirecteffect = .32, SE = .44, 95% CI [–.38, 1.34]

8. Three verdict options will reduce the percentage of guilty verdicts.
Discussion
In the two verdict condition, gruesome photographs will increase guilty verdicts.
In the three verdict condition, gruesome photographs will not increase guilty verdicts.
Three verdict options will reduce the percentage of guilty verdicts.

9. Implications
Jurors presented with both gruesome photographs and an alternative acquittal option seek to justify their preferred guilty verdict
Emotional jurors may do the same when presented with less punitive verdicts
Future research is needed to explore this possibility

10. References
Bray, S. (2005). Not Proven: Introducing a Third Verdict. University of Chicago Law Review, 72, 1299–1329.
Hope, L., Greene, E., Memon, A., Gavisk, M., & Houston, K. (2008). A third verdict option: Exploring the impact of the not proven verdict on mock juror decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 32(3), 241–252.
Leipold, A. D. (2000). The problem of the innocent, acquitted defendant. Northwestern University Law Review, 94(4), 1297–
Myers, R. E. (2009). Requiring a jury vote of censure to convict. North Carolina Law Review, 88, 137–184.
Robinson, P. H. & Cahill, M. T. (2005). Law without justice: Why criminal law doesn't give people what they deserve. New York: Oxford University Press.
Smithson, M., Deady, S., & Gracik, L. (2007). Guilty, not guilty, or...? Multiple options in jury verdict choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 481–498.