Juveniles tried as adults: the age of the juvenile matters

Serious juvenile crimes require evaluation of a child as a criminal defendant in adult court. In such cases, it is crucial to understand jurors' attitudes, biases, and ability to follow legal instructions and maintain fairness. 308 undergraduate psychology students served as mock jurors, were randomly separated into four groups, and each group read the same realistic summary of a trial with the defendant's age presented as 13, 15, 17, or 21 years. Participants were asked to render guilty or not guilty verdicts and, if guilty, to suggest sentences. Chi-squared analysis indicated 13- and 15-year-old defendants were convicted less often than 17- and 21-year-old defendants, showing that jurors distinguished between juvenile defendants of different ages, but not minors and adults as defined by law. Additional analysis showed that age did not affect sentencing recommendations. Decision processes jurors use for juveniles tried as adults are discussed.