The Netflix documentary Making a Murderer made national headlines by chronicling the conflict between Steven Avery and the Manitowoc County legal system. After spending 18 years in prison for a wrongful conviction, Avery was arrested again and found guilty of the murder of Teresa Halbach. Due to the controversial nature of the case, and the popularity associated with the documentary, this event was used to evaluate several variables that may influence judgment on decisions of a defendant's guilt or innocence. Participants (N ϭ 905) were recruited online via several social media platforms and included in the study if they acknowledged watching the documentary. They then completed an online survey containing questionnaires related to demographics (e.g., gender, ethnicity), perceptual (e.g., punitive attitudes), and psychosocial characteristics (e.g., posttraumatic stress symptom severity). The majority of participants rated both Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, also convicted in association for the crime, as innocent. Female participants reported higher ratings of guilt than males. Lower ratings of guilt were associated with lower levels of socioeconomic status, greater religious involvement, higher posttraumatic stress symptoms, and greater negative attitudes toward the judicial system. Race and political beliefs were unrelated to ratings of guilt. These results support previous research suggesting psychological and demographic variables may influence jurors' judgments of guilt in murder trials. Implications concerning maintaining impartiality among jury peers and preventing implicit biases are discussed. Public Policy Relevance StatementDue to the controversial nature of the Steven Avery murder case, and the popularity associated with the Making a Murderer documentary, this event was used to evaluate several variables that may influence judgment on decisions of a defendant's guilt or innocence. The results support previous research suggesting psychological and demographic variables may influence jurors' judgments of guilt in murder trials. Implications concerning maintaining impartiality among jury peers and preventing implicit biases are discussed.

No abstract