Podcast: A discussion between Dr Lee John Curley, Professor Fiona Leverick, and Professor James Chalmers on the Scottish Jury Study.

Related content

• Research Outputs

• Verdict spotting: investigating the effects of juror bias, evidence anchors and verdict system in jurors

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• Not proven and back again: an academics’ tale

  Research output: Contribution to specialist publication › Article

• The bastard verdict and its influence on jurors

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• Scotland’s ‘not proven’ verdict does affect jurors decisions – but removing it may not improve rape conviction rates

  Research output: Contribution to specialist publication › Article

• Jurors who believe rape myths contribute to dismal conviction rates – but judge-only trials won’t solve the problem

  Research output: Contribution to specialist publication › Article

• Proven and not proven: a potential alternative to the current Scottish verdict system

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• Informing reform: the views of legal professionals on the unique aspects of Scottish Law

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• Scotland’s ‘not proven’ verdict helps juries communicate their belief of guilt when lack of evidence fails to convict

  Research output: Contribution to specialist publication › Article

• Double jeopardy: the effects of retrial knowledge on juror decisions

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• The effect of verdict system on juror decisions: a quantitative meta-analysis

  Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

• Scotland’s unique three-verdict system is put to the test as experts argue for and against scrapping not proven

  Research output: Contribution to specialist publication › Article