Attitudes Towards Police Legitimacy and Mock Grand Juror Indictment Decisions in Cases of Lethal Force

Abstract

Two experiments examined the potentially interactive effects of shooter identity (police officer vs. civilian) and unarmed victim race (Black vs. White) on grand juror decision-making. In Experiments 1 (N = 350) and 2 (N = 344), mock grand jurors read and listened to mock testimony detailing the shooting by a police officer or civilian of an unarmed suspect (Black vs. White) and rendered an indictment decision. Those who chose to indict then selected a charge. Participants then completed several case-related and individual difference measures (e.g., attitudes toward police legitimacy). In both experiments, there was no impact of victim race on indictment decisions. However, participants exposed to a police shooter were more likely to blame the victim compared to those exposed to a civilian shooter and were less likely to indict the officer. Further, attitudes toward police legitimacy predicted indictment and charging decision leniency, regardless of shooter identity or victim race.