Liberation Reconsidered: Understanding Why Judges and Juries Disagree about Guilt

39 Pages Posted: 17 Dec 2011 Last revised: 22 Dec 2011

Amy S. Farrell

Northeastern University

Daniel Givelber

Northeastern University - School of Law

Date Written: 2010

Abstract

Data collected in four jurisdictions by the National Center for State Courts allows us to examine the question of judge and jury disagreement about guilt through a consideration of the views of jurors as well as judges. Using this data, we test in a modern context the hypothesis that the jury's embrace of values -- as opposed to its different assessment of the evidence -- explains why juries acquit when judges would convict. We find that legal and extralegal factors affect both judge and jury decisions about guilt, that both sets of factors predict disagreement in different contexts, and the pattern of agreement versus disagreement is more complex than suggested by the liberation hypothesis.

Suggested Citation

Farrell, Amy S. and Givelber, Daniel, Liberation Reconsidered: Understanding Why Judges and Juries Disagree about Guilt (2010). The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 100, No. 4, pp. 1549-1586, Fall 2010; Northeastern University School of Law Research Paper No. 67-2011. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1973117

Amy S. Farrell

Northeastern University ( email )

Boston, MA 02115
United States

Daniel James Givelber (Contact Author)

Northeastern University - School of Law ( email )

400 Huntington Ave.
Boston, MA 02115
United States
617-373-4298 (Phone)
617-373-5056 (Fax)

Paper statistics

Downloads
106
Rank
209,734
Abstract Views
890