Title

This research project explores mock jury perceptions toward security personnel's use of force in a genuine contested grievous bodily harm case, replicated for the purposes of this study. This is the first study to date to examine jury decision making in such a case, and in an effort to further improve on the limitations of previous mock jury research, juror decision making was examined through analysis of group deliberations, something which very few mock jury studies do. This study investigates which evidence and information are used by jurors during deliberation in their effort to determine the guilt of two security personnel accused of using excessive force. Two mock jury panels, consisting of 12 people, were asked to deliberate on a trial brief based on two security guards' questionable use of force; this was recorded with deliberation records later subjected to thematic analysis in an effort to better understand how decisions were reached in this case. Four main themes were identified across the two deliberations, with medical evidence substantially dominating jury deliberations, alongside pre-trial pre convictions notions of security guards and the and the sort of conduct they are likely to engage in. This study contributes significantly to the existing literature on extralegal influences on mock juries in that it takes use of under-utilized mock jury deliberation in an effort to better understand juror decision making within a security use of force case which no prior jury research has sought to investigate. Implications of future research directions are discussed.