Jurors' reactions to satanic ritual abuse allegations

Some of the most highly publicized child sexual abuse trials of this century have involved bizarre allegations of satanic ritual abuse, yet little is known about jurors' reactions to ritual abuse claims. We investigated how jurors' judgements of defendant guilt and witness credibility are affected by the presence or absence of satanic ritual abuse allegations.

Two hundred forty-three mock jurors rendered judgments about a case involving childhood sexual abuse allegations made by either a 5-year-old child or a 30-year-old adult survivor. The presence or absence of satanic ritual abuse allegations was varied between subjects. Jurors' religiosity was measured.

Although jurors were significantly less likely to believe the satanic ritual allegations than other case details, they were as likely to vote guilty and to believe the victim in satanic as in nonsatanic cases. Victim age had no significant effect on mock jurors' judgments, but there were marked individual differences in decisions: When the allegations involved satanic ritual abuse, religious jurors were more likely than less religious jurors to believe the victim. Further, across all conditions, women made more pro-victim judgements than did men.

Our findings suggest that highly bizarre details may be discounted by jurors (particularly less religious jurors), but that jurors may set aside their skepticism of satanic ritual details and make judgments about child sexual abuse cases based on their perceptions of the credibility of nonsatanic allegations of harm. Whether or not this is an accurate approach to decision-making in these cases remains an empirical question.