A Comparison of Juror Decision Making in Race-Based and Sexual Orientation–Based Hate Crime Cases. Issue 7 (April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gamblin, Bradlee W.; Kehn, Andre; Vanderzanden, Karen; Ruthig, Joelle C.; Jones, Kelly M.; Long, Brittney L.
• Is Part Of: Journal of interpersonal violence. Volume 36:Issue 7/8(2021)
• Page Start: 3231
• Page End: 3256
• Publication Date: 2021-04
• Subjects: hate crimes -- criminology -- violence against -- GLBT; Violence -- Periodicals; Sex crimes -- Periodicals; Violence -- Périodiques; Crimes sexuels -- Périodiques; 364.15
• DOI: 10.1177/0886260518774305
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-2605

Abstract

Several constructs have been identified as relevant to the juror decision-making process in hate crime cases. However, there is a lack of research on the relationships between these constructs and their variable influence across victim group. The purpose of the current study was to reexamine factors relevant to the juror decision-making process in hate crime cases within a structural model, and across victim group, to gauge the relative strength and explanatory power of various predictors. In the current study, 313 participants sentenced a perpetrator found guilty of a hate crime committed against either a Black man or a gay man; participants also responded to individual difference measures relevant to mock juror hate crime decision making, including prejudice toward the victim's social group. Using path analysis, we explored the role of juror prejudice on sentencing decisions in hate crime cases as well as similarities and differences based on the victimized group. Results indicated that, when the victim was a Black man, modern racism influenced sentencing both directly and indirectly through perpetrator blame attributions, explaining 18% of the variance in sentencing. In contrast, when the victim was a gay man, modern homophobia did not directly predict sentencing, and the overall model explained only 4% of the variance in sentencing, suggesting variables beyond juror prejudice may be better suited to explain juror decision making in sexual orientation–based hate crimes. The current study suggests that the role of juror prejudice in hate crime cases varies as a function of the victimized group and raises questions about the importance of juror prejudice in the sentencing of hate crime cases, particularly antigay prejudice. The importance of blame attributions, social dominance orientation, and juror beliefs regarding penalty enhancements for hate crime cases, as well as policy implications, are also addressed.