Mentor/s
Prof. Anthony Papa
Participation Type
Paper Talk
Abstract
The legal process of the criminal justice system may be rooted in facts, but how a jury interprets those facts is inherently subjective. Their perception is influenced by how the case is framed, who is speaking, and how compelling the story is, not just by the evidence alone. This paper explores how psychological factors impact the perception of evidence in court by comparing the People v. Simpson murder trial and the Depp v. Heard defamation lawsuit. Both trials involved large amounts of forensic or digital evidence, expert witness testimony, and media attention, but produced very different outcomes.
In the Simpson trial, the prosecution’s weak delivery, questionable chain of custody, and unreliable witnesses raised significant doubt in the jury despite the strong forensic evidence, ultimately resulting in an acquittal. In contrast, the Depp trial featured clearly presented arguments, professional expert testimony, and organized evidence that gave the jury confidence in Depp’s claims. These cases highlight how jury perception can be shaped by more than just facts alone. Presentation, clarity, demeanor, and perceived credibility and integrity can all influence how evidence is interpreted.
Additional factors, such as confirmation bias and the CSI effect, further impact how jurors process and evaluate information during a trial. Strong evidence can be ignored or deemed invalid in the eyes of the jury if it is mishandled, poorly explained, or comes from a seemingly untrustworthy source. By analyzing these two high-profile cases, this paper emphasizes how psychological perception often determines the outcomes in a courtroom, rather than factual validity. These findings suggest that how evidence is delivered can be just as important as what the evidence actually proves.
College and Major available
College of Arts and Sciences, Psychology BS
Academic Level
Undergraduate student
Location
Session 5: Digital Commons & Martire 127
Start Day/Time
4-24-2025 2:00 PM
End Day/Time
4-24-2025 3:15 PM
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License
"If It Doesn't Fit, You Must Acquit": The Perception of Evidence
Session 5: Digital Commons & Martire 127
The legal process of the criminal justice system may be rooted in facts, but how a jury interprets those facts is inherently subjective. Their perception is influenced by how the case is framed, who is speaking, and how compelling the story is, not just by the evidence alone. This paper explores how psychological factors impact the perception of evidence in court by comparing the People v. Simpson murder trial and the Depp v. Heard defamation lawsuit. Both trials involved large amounts of forensic or digital evidence, expert witness testimony, and media attention, but produced very different outcomes.
In the Simpson trial, the prosecution’s weak delivery, questionable chain of custody, and unreliable witnesses raised significant doubt in the jury despite the strong forensic evidence, ultimately resulting in an acquittal. In contrast, the Depp trial featured clearly presented arguments, professional expert testimony, and organized evidence that gave the jury confidence in Depp’s claims. These cases highlight how jury perception can be shaped by more than just facts alone. Presentation, clarity, demeanor, and perceived credibility and integrity can all influence how evidence is interpreted.
Additional factors, such as confirmation bias and the CSI effect, further impact how jurors process and evaluate information during a trial. Strong evidence can be ignored or deemed invalid in the eyes of the jury if it is mishandled, poorly explained, or comes from a seemingly untrustworthy source. By analyzing these two high-profile cases, this paper emphasizes how psychological perception often determines the outcomes in a courtroom, rather than factual validity. These findings suggest that how evidence is delivered can be just as important as what the evidence actually proves.
Students' Information
Brooke Rizzuto - Senior
Psychology major, Math and Criminal Justice minors, Honors student, Class of 2025 (May).