Assessing alibi believability: the alibi story, presence of physical evidence and timing of disclosure.

The content of the alibi story, corroborative physical evidence and timing of the alibi's disclosure may all affect alibi believability. CloudResearch workers (N = 276) read a mock case. The defendant's alibi story was scandalous (or neutral), included a receipt (or no mention), and was disclosed one day (or three weeks) later. Participants rated the alibi's believability, the defendant's character, and rendered a verdict. As expected, alibi believability ratings were higher when the alibi story was neutral versus scandalous (p < .01) Similarly, the defendant was viewed positively on all eight traits when the alibi story was neutral (ps < .05). The defendant was seen as more trustworthy when he did not have a receipt than when he did (p < .05). Alibi timing had little impact on the dependent measures, but participants were more certain in their verdicts when the alibi was early versus late (p < .05).

Alibi believability: Corroborative evidence and contextual factors.

A disbelief in alibis is one contributor to wrongful convictions. One reason that triers-of-fact may disbelieve alibis is that they lack evidence to corroborate the whereabouts of the suspect at the time of the crime. Contextual factors, such as when the alibi was disclosed and what was the nature of the crime, can also affect alibi believability. This paper outlines two studies where mock jurors evaluated an investigation and trial description online and rated alibi believability, defendant character trait ratings, and verdicts. Both studies examined the impact of corroborative alibi evidence and the timing of the alibi disclosure. In addition, Study 1 included the type of crime and Study 2 included the number of alibi corroborators as additional independent variables. We hypothesized that alibis would be viewed more positively when they were disclosed earlier rather than later, were corroborated by strong physical evidence and multiple corroborators, and involved less violent offenses. As hypothesized, in both studies, alibis with strong physical evidence were thought to be more believable than those with no physical evidence but the number of corroborators and type of crime did not affect any dependent measures. Delayed timing had some negative effects on views of the defendant's character. Corroborative physical evidence affected alibi believability consistently, and contextual factors mattered less. Both implications and suggestions for future research are further discussed.

Sex offender registries: exploring the attitudes and knowledge of political decision-makers.

Sex offender registries (SORs) were established due to policies and practices intended to protect the public from individuals who commit sexually violent acts, and yet the empirical literature does not show that public SORs reduce or prevent sexual crimes. Given that politicians prominently influence SOR policies, the current study explores the views of SORs by 26 political decision-makers from Canada and the United States. Participants completed a survey on their opinions regarding SORs and their knowledge of SOR eligibility. Attitudes and political perspectives were assessed to examine their association with SOR opinions. Almost two thirds of those surveyed believed SORs should be publicly available, and one third believed SORs helped to protect the public. These beliefs were associated with those with conservative-leaning political views. These findings help us to explore the perspectives of political decision-makers and gain insight into attitudinal factors that may play a role in influencing opinions regarding SORs.

Age differences and schema effects in memory for crime information.

UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND/STUDY CONTEXT: This study investigated age-related differences in memory for crime information. Older adults have been found to rely more than young adults on schema- and stereotype-based processing in memory, and such age differences may have implications in the criminal justice system. Some prior research has examined schema-based processing among older adults in legal settings, but no studies have tested for schema effects on older adults' memory for specific details of a crime. METHODS: Older adults (N = 56, ages 65-93) and young adults (N = 52, ages 18-22) read a passage about a criminal suspect's "bad" or "good" childhood, and then read a crime report containing incriminating, exonerating, and neutral details with regard to the suspect. Participants were subsequently tested on recognition of accurate versus altered details from the crime report. Participants also rated the suspect"s guilt, and completed a battery of neuropsychological tests. Correct and false recognition rates were analyzed with ANOVA to compare means across age group, evidence type, and background type, and guilt ratings were analyzed with linear regression using neuropsychological scores as predictors. RESULTS: Among older adults, an interaction was found between evidence type (incriminating/exonerating) and suspect's background (good/bad childhood) in false recognition of altered details from the crime report, supporting the hypothesis that schema-based processing influenced older adult memory from crime information. Additionally, although guilt ratings were not related to the suspect's background for either age group, they were predicted by older adults' short-delay recall (ß = -.37), suggesting that cognitive decline may play a role in older adults' interpretations of evidence. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest reduced cognitive capacity in older adults increases schema-based processing in memory for crime information, and are consistent with research in other domains that has demonstrated greater schema effects in memory with aging. The results may have implications for criminal justice, and open up possibilities for further research on how young and older adults may differ in memory for specific types of crime information.

Perceptions of older adult eyewitnesses: will you believe me when I'm 64?

Participant-witnesses (young adults/young seniors/older seniors) viewed one of two versions of a simulated videotaped crime (crime context either familiar to young or older adults). The witnesses were videotaped responding to direct and cross-examination questions about the video. The older seniors were significantly less accurate than the young adults and young seniors. Familiarity of the crime context did not affect testimony accuracy. However, the older seniors were more verbose when describing a familiar context. Participant-jurors viewed the testimony videotapes and evaluated the witnesses' credibility. All witnesses were regarded as equally credible in testifying and less accurate in response to cross-examination questioning.