Emotional Evidence in Court

The Impact of Experienced and Expressed Emotion on Legal Factfinding

“…Positive moral emotions, such as sympathy or empathy for victims, are correlated with decreased convictions (Jones et al 2020), whereas empathy for defendants can increase convictions (Archer et al 1979, Haegerich & Bottoms 2000 Emotionally evocative evidence can elicit these moral emotions in jurors, which are, in turn, associated with harsher verdicts and punishment. These experiments most commonly test the impact of gruesome photographs of victims and victim impact statements (VIS) from victims or their families (Bandes & Salerno 2014, Phalen et al 2020, Salerno & Bottoms 2009. When mock jurors are randomly assigned to view gruesome photographs of victims' injuries, they render verdicts more in line with blaming the defendant and harsher punishments, compared with those who learn about the details of the injuries through verbal testimony (Grady et al 2018).…”

“…Victim impact statement (VIS) studies provide converging evidence that emotional responses to evidence can lead to harsher judgments. Mock jurors exposed to VIS recommended harsher sentences than those who were not exposed (Bandes & Salerno 2014, Phalen et al 2020). At least one study identified emotional reactions as the explanation: Mock jurors who saw VIS were more likely to recommend the death penalty than those who did not see VIS, because such statements increased sympathy/empathy toward the victim (Paternoster & Deise 2011).…”

Affective disgust predicts blame for gay male homicide victims

“…For example, courts could instruct jurors to not let their emotions prejudice their judgments. This is not uncommon-judges routinely instruct juries that they should avoid letting their emotions affect their judgment (Phalen et al, 2021)-and evidence suggests that these types of instructions may be effective at reducing the effect of bias on jury decision-making (Kraus & Ragatz, 2011).…”

Disgust, Hate, and the Law

“…Anger and disgust are associated generally with a need to punish, which in a capital trial can translate to a greater likelihood of imposing a death sentence (compared to jurors who did not feel the same level of anger and disgust) -despite all mock jurors hearing the same evidence. 62 According to these authors, the underlying reason is that under the influence of this emotion, individuals tend to feel more confident in their own opinions. This heightened confidence, in turn, leads to a suboptimal evaluation of the evidence presented in court and a biased estimation of the information provided, manifesting as confirmation bias.…”

“…This biased cognitive process contributes to a predisposition towards condemnation and a propensity for harsher punishments. 63 They also conducted studies regarding the perception of specific means of proof. While presenting vivid evidence may enhance the jury's (or judge's) memory of reported data, it can also give rise to biases.…”