Search results

The purpose of the paper is to investigate how judges and the general population formulate judgments on legal cases, considering both legal and extralegal factors, with a focus on the significance of the defendant’s sex.

The first experiment aimed to determine if non-lawyers’ judgments are affected by the defendant’s sex, using brief excerpts from indictments with the defendant’s sex interchanged. Study 2 aimed to verify if this effect applies to future lawyers, suggesting a peculiar approval granted by men to women displaying illegal sexual behaviour towards young men.

The findings showed that the sex of the offender only influenced judgments in sexual offences, with male participants being more lenient towards female offenders.

The originality/value of the paper lies in its examination of the influence of the defendant’s sex on judgments made by both judges and the general population, specifically focussing on non-lawyers’ judgments. While previous studies have shown that judges tend to be more lenient towards women in certain cases, this paper adds novelty by investigating whether a similar effect is observed among non-lawyers. Moreover, the research sheds light on the relevance of the defendant's sex in cases of sexual offences and identifies a gender-specific leniency towards female offenders, particularly among male participants. The study also explores how this effect might extend to future lawyers, providing insights into societal attitudes regarding illegal sexual behaviour involving women and young men. Overall, the paper contributes valuable information to the understanding of how sex-based biases can influence legal judgments and decision-making processes.

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect gender has on the public perceptions of offenders with mental health issues. The authors aim to understand how offenders with mental illness are viewed by the public so future information and practices can be implemented to further educate on the topic of mental illness. Research has shown that mental health education can be a pivotal part of reducing risk and crime among the mentally ill population.

This study applies a quantitative design using vignettes. There were four scenarios, two as controls, and two experimental variables to examine how responses differed depending on gender and mental health. Twenty statements then followed each vignette and participants were asked to share how much they aligned their opinions with each statement on a five-point Likert scale. The sample was comprised of 80 participants.

The findings of this study largely support the relevant literature on the topic of gender and mental illness in offenders. Overall, the public was the least supportive of female offenders with mental illness, followed by male offenders with mental illness, then male offenders and lastly the most support was directed towards female offenders. Therefore, the present study’s initial hypotheses are also supported in that female offenders will garner a more sympathetic reaction than their male counterparts. However, if female offenders have mental health issues, they are viewed more negatively than males.

For future replication of this study, the authors consider that a larger and more gender-balanced sample size would increase the ecological validity of the findings. Despite this, the findings of this study do fall in line with the relevant literature. Therefore, suggesting perhaps that the gender of the sample does not affect the overall outcome of the results.

Education regarding mental health for the public should be implemented as research has found this effective in de-stigmatising and helping to create protective factors to reduce offending. More training is needed for professionals within the criminal justice system, including police personnel, to ensure they are better equipped to consider the needs and behaviours of mentally ill individuals. The authors suggest that mental health awareness should be taught as part of the education system in the UK to help de-stigmatise and share helpful resources. The prison system in the UK needs to be able to provide better treatment programmes for inmates with mental health issues as research shows this is the most effective form of treatment at reducing recidivism.

The social implications of this study are that it aims to understand perceptions of mental illness, gender and offending and, therefore, use the conclusions drawn to inform what is needed to improve perceptions if necessary. De-stigmatising and acknowledging mental illness can allow for better access to appropriate treatment. Facilitating reintegration back into society, and, therefore, increasing peer support which has been shown to reduce reoffending rates within the mentally ill population.

There are very few research studies looking at the impact of both gender and mental illness on how offenders are perceived. Most relevant research tends to either pick one or the other and therefore the present study is unique. In addition, most established research looks at the perception of a specific population. Whereas the present study has used a small but broad UK participant sample which is likely to be more generalisable. Finally, the results of this research have been able to both meet the aims of the study and accept the proposed hypotheses.

This study aims to analyze corporate mail and wire fraud penalties, using bounded rationality in decision-making and assessing internal and external influences on prosecutorial choices.

The study analyzed 467 cases from 1992 to 2019, using data from the Corporate Prosecution Registry of the University of Virginia School of Law and Duke University School of Law. It examined corporations facing mail and wire fraud charges and other fraud crimes. Multiple regression linked predictor variables to the dependent variable, total payment.

The study found that corporate penalties tend to be lower for financial institutions or corporations in countries with US free trade agreements. Conversely, penalties are higher when the company is a U.S. public company or filed in districts with more pending criminal cases.

This study’s originality lies in applying the bounded rationality model to assess corporate prosecutorial decisions, unveiling external factors’ influence on corporate penalties.

The purpose of this study is to examine public perceptions and attitudes toward using artificial intelligence (AI) in the US criminal justice system.

The authors took a quantitative approach and administered an online survey using the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform. The instrument was developed by integrating prior literature to create multiple scales for measuring public perceptions and attitudes.

The findings suggest that despite the various attempts, there are still significant perceptions of sociodemographic bias in the criminal justice system and technology alone cannot alleviate them. However, AI can assist judges in making fairer and more objective decisions by using triangulation – offering additional data points to offset individual biases.

Other scholars can build upon the findings and extend the work to shed more light on some problems of growing concern for society – bias and inequality in criminal sentencing. AI can be a valuable tool to assist judges in the decision-making process by offering diverse viewpoints. Furthermore, the authors bridge the gap between the fields of technology and criminal justice and demonstrate how the two can be successfully integrated for the benefit of society.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is among the first studies to examine a complex societal problem like the introduction of technology in a high-stakes environment – the US criminal justice system. Understanding how AI is perceived by society is necessary to develop more transparent and unbiased algorithms for assisting judges in making fair and equitable sentencing decisions. In addition, the authors developed and validated a new scale that can be used to further examine this novel approach to criminal sentencing in the future.