The influence of mitigation evidence, ethnicity, and SES on death penalty decisions by European American and Latino venire persons.

Abstract

The purpose of the research was to determine whether European American and Latino mock jurors would demonstrate bias in death penalty decision making when mitigation evidence and defendant ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) were varied. A total of 561 actual venire persons acted as mock jurors and read a trial transcript that varied a defendant's case information (mitigating circumstances: strong/weak, defendant ethnicity: European American/Latino, and defendant SES: low/high). European American jurors recommended the death penalty significantly more often for the low SES Latino defendant when strength of mitigation evidence was weak. In addition, they also assigned this defendant higher culpability ratings and lower ratings on positive personality trait measures compared with all other conditions. Strong mitigation evidence contributed to lower guilt ratings by European American jurors for the high SES European American defendant. Latino jurors did not differ in their death penalty sentencing across defendant mitigation, ethnicity, or SES conditions. Discussion of in-group favoritism and out-group derogation, as well as suggestions for procedures to diminish juror bias in death penalty cases, is provided.

An intersectional approach to understanding how race and social class affect intergroup processes

“…Studies that have branched out beyond Black–White comparisons have found that social class moderates discrimination outcomes for other ethnic groups as well. As one example, low social class Hispanics are likely to receive longer and harsher criminal sentences than middle or high social class Hispanics (Espinoza & Willis‐Esqueda, ; Esqueda, Espinoza, & Culhane, ). It could be that these effects can be applied to other marginalized racial group members who face low levels of social class.…”

“…Hispanics (Espinoza & Willis-Esqueda, 2015;Esqueda, Espinoza, & Culhane, 2008). It could be that these effects can be applied to other marginalized racial group members who face low levels of social class.…”

How defendants’ legal status and ethnicity and participants’ political orientation relate to death penalty sentencing decisions.

“…Similarly, White mock jurors report greater endorsement of aggravators and lower endorsement of mitigators in cases with an African American (compared to White) defendant (Lynch & Haney, 2011). White mock jurors were also more punitive toward Latino defendants in cases with weak (vs. strong) mitigating evidence (Espinoza & Willis-Esqueda, 2015).…”

“…Similarly, Latino defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death in capital punishment cases (Thomson, 1997). Experimental studies have shown that White jurors are biased against Latino defendants, compared to White defendants (Espinoza & Willis-Esqueda, 2008, 2015; Willis-Esqueda, Espinoza, & Culhane, 2008). White participants found the Mexican American defendant being perceived as being more responsible, being blamed more, and having their version of the events less likely to be believed, compared to the White defendant (Willis-Esqueda et al, 2008).…”

An Empirical Comparison of the Old and Revised Jury Instructions of California: Do Jurors Comprehend Legal Ease Better or Does Bias Still Exist?

“…Though attitudes towards the justice system have been widely investigated in areas such as the death penalty [23], influences of gender and race on juror decision making [24] [25] [26], and insanity [27], there have been no studies to date that relate attitudes towards the criminal system and comprehension of legal terminology [16]. If we are to accurately define how juror instructions contribute to accurate decision making by juror members, then we must rule out other possible explanations, namely the attitudes towards the legal system a juror brings with them in the first place.…”