This collection includes both ASU Theses and Dissertations, submitted by graduate students, and the Barrett, Honors College theses submitted by undergraduate students. 

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

134840-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This study compared mock jurors' verdict decisions regarding three different insanity defenses that are used across jurisdictions in the United States' Criminal Justice System. Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity (NGRI), Guilty Except Insane (GEI) and Guilty But Mentally Ill (GBMI) all have different effects on the defendant and on

This study compared mock jurors' verdict decisions regarding three different insanity defenses that are used across jurisdictions in the United States' Criminal Justice System. Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity (NGRI), Guilty Except Insane (GEI) and Guilty But Mentally Ill (GBMI) all have different effects on the defendant and on the system, but little is known about how jurors' will use these different verdicts. This study used a vignette and online survey delivered through MTurk to see which of the three verdicts, if rendered, would be more preferable by the mock jurors. It was predicted that GEI (a "compromise" verdict with elements from both NGRI and GBMI) would be more favorable than NGRI (the most lenient) but less favorable that GBMI (the strictest). However, the findings indicated that lay people cannot tell the difference between the three insanity verdicts: an equal proportion of mock jurors in each condition chose the relevant insanity verdict. Limitations, implications, and future directions are discussed.
ContributorsSiso, Cassidy Brooke (Author) / Neal, Tess M.S. (Thesis director) / Schweitzer, Nick (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Hugh Downs School of Human Communication (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
137581-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Forensic pathologists investigate unnatural or suspicious deaths in medico-legal cases and must be accurate and thorough in their analyses so that justice can prevail. This occupation, however, is immensely difficult, and mistakes can occur. These challenges are discussed here with suggestions for improvement. Implementing new technologies, better quality control, more

Forensic pathologists investigate unnatural or suspicious deaths in medico-legal cases and must be accurate and thorough in their analyses so that justice can prevail. This occupation, however, is immensely difficult, and mistakes can occur. These challenges are discussed here with suggestions for improvement. Implementing new technologies, better quality control, more research, and standardization of procedures are just a few of the multiple changes that can enhance forensic pathology.
ContributorsFitzgerald, Jesse Lee (Author) / McQuiston, Dawn (Thesis director) / Schweitzer, Nick (Committee member) / Lafond, Sue (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor)
Created2013-05