First Impressions Last? Lay-Judges’ Assessments of Credible Victimhood

This article explores how Swedish lay-judges assess victims’ credibility in district court. Previous studies have explored how biases and emotional expressions impact credibility assessments. Adding to this, the present study analyses how lay-judges assess courtroom credibility from an intersectiona...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Heber, Anita (Author) ; Fredriksson, Tea (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2025
In: The British journal of criminology
Year: 2025, Volume: 65, Issue: 4, Pages: 709-725
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Victimhood
Victims
courtroom
Judges
Credibility
Intersectionality
Description
Summary:This article explores how Swedish lay-judges assess victims’ credibility in district court. Previous studies have explored how biases and emotional expressions impact credibility assessments. Adding to this, the present study analyses how lay-judges assess courtroom credibility from an intersectional perspective. Based on 24 in-depth interviews with lay-judges, the study explores three intertwined layers of credibility: appearances, narratives and emotions. The analysis concludes that these layers actualize balancing acts for both victims and the lay-judges assessing them. These layers of credibility can compound for victims, making them particularly credible in the eyes of the lay-judges, especially if and when they perform victimhood in line with expectations set by their intersectional characteristics.
ISSN:1464-3529
DOI:10.1093/bjc/azae086