But Was He Sorry? The Role of Remorse in Capital Sentencing

What role does remorse really play in capital sentencing? We divide this basic question in two. First, what makes jurors come to believe a defendant is remorseful? Second, does a belief in the defendant\u27s remorse affect the jury\u27s final judgment of life or death? Here we present a systematic, empirical analysis that tries to answer these questions. What makes jurors think a defendant is remorseful? Among other things, we find that the more jurors think that the crime is coldblooded, calculated, and depraved and that the defendant is dangerous, the less likely they are to think the defendant is remorseful. Conversely, the less they think the defendant is responsible for the crime, the more likely they are to believe he is remorseful. The defendant\u27s demeanor during trial also influences jurors\u27 beliefs about remorse. As for the background and the attitudes of the jurors themselves, we find that jurors with strong views in favor of the death penalty are less likely to think the defendant is remorseful. We also find that while racial factors generally do not influence jurors\u27 beliefs about the defendant\u27s remorse, white women are least likely to believe the defendant is remorseful. Does a defendant\u27s remorse or lack of remorse affect the sentence he receives? The general answer is yes. The more precise answer is sometimes. Remorse benefits some defendants, but not others. In multivariate models of sentencing outcomes that account for the perceived viciousness of the crime, we find that jurors\u27 belief in the defendant\u27s remorse noticeably improves the predictive value of the models--provided jurors do not think the crime is extremely vicious. When jurors do think the crime is extremely vicious, their belief in the defendant\u27s remorse appears to have little influence on the sentence he receives