Public perceptions of castle doctrine and stand your ground cases |
| |
| Authors: | Emma Sower Apryl A. Alexander Hannah Klukoff |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Clinical Psychology Department, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, California, USA;2. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA;3. McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Introduction Stand your ground (SYG) and castle doctrine (CD) laws are presently growing throughout the United States. The present study aims to better understand public perceptions of SYG and CD cases and demographic factors that influence judicial decision making. Methods Participants were 204 adults who were randomly assigned one of four vignettes that depicted a CD or SYG scenario and varied by defendant demographics. After reading the vignette, participants completed a questionnaire assessing whether they believed the defendant was guilty of the murder and whether the homicide was justified. Results Results indicated participants were more likely to assign a guilty verdict to the SYG scenario, compared to the CD scenario. Additionally, participants assigned to the SYG vignette believed the male defendant was more justified in killing the victim, compared to participants assigned the female defendant. Conclusion Results from this study reveal how potential jurors may harbor sex/gender bias in determining justifiable homicide in stand your ground cases. |
| |
| Keywords: | castle doctrine gender justifiable homicide policy race self-defense stand your ground laws |
|
|
