Do Juries Let Some Defendants Get Away With Murder? Examining the Effect of Pre-Cognitive Decision Making on Insanity Defense Cases

Abstract

This research examines the effect of bias on Insanity Defense cases, theorizing that juries treat Insanity Defense cases differently from other types of cases because they are ill equipped to contemplate them. Insanity Defense cases are statistically rare, yet the success rate of such defenses is surprisingly high. This thesis presents a qualitative argument examining reasons for the success of the Insanity Defense, explains the neuroscience, and effect of group dynamics on decision making, and contextualizes such decision making by examining instances of it in other venues, including business, social hysteria, and riotous reaction to art events. It proposes a finding that decision-making in these cases is affected by a newly identified phenomenon called “Pre-cognitive decision making” (PCDM). PCDM is an evolved decision making protocol that is unconsciously relied upon in non-standard or stressful situations when people first make decisions. Building upon the research by others in Implicit Bias, and the neuroscience of decision making and group dynamics, the author explains how juries and legal professionals may reinforce PCDM through strategies– both unconscious and conscious– intended to reinforce rather than challenge their original, emotionally driven pre-cognitive decision. The author provides a research design for quantitative verification of the research.