Selecting among Acquitted Defendants: Procedural Choice versus Selective Compensation/Comment/Comment

We consider two means for implementing the informational benefits of the Scottish verdict (a three-outcome verdict) in a two-outcome legal system. Leipold proposed allowing defendants to choose to be tried under the two-outcome or the three-outcome verdict. In equilibrium, all defendants choose the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of institutional and theoretical economics Vol. 172; no. 1; pp. 113 - 141
Main Authors Daughety, Andrew F, Reinganum, Jennifer F, Dusek, Libor, Wohlschlegel, Ansgar
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Tübingen Mohr Siebeck 01.03.2016
Subjects
Acquittals & mistrials
Civil procedure
Compensation
Convictions
Criminal pleas
Equilibrium
Plea bargaining
Sanctions
Scotland
Studies
Trials
United Kingdom > UK
Scotland
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:We consider two means for implementing the informational benefits of the Scottish verdict (a three-outcome verdict) in a two-outcome legal system. Leipold proposed allowing defendants to choose to be tried under the two-outcome or the three-outcome verdict. In equilibrium, all defendants choose the three-outcome verdict, which requires a wholesale shift of the legal system (something unlikely to occur in, for example, the U.S.). Alternatively, we consider selective compensation of acquitted defendants by the jury for those believed to deserve compensation. This results in reduced informal sanctions for those selected defendants and may also lead to enhanced accountability of prosecutors.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0932-4569
1614-0559
DOI:10.1628/093245616X14465331079533