Speed and contextual information of a crime-related video bias the responsibility judgments

Courts often rely on video evidence, assuming it accurately shows important legal details. Yet, studies suggest that video isn’t inherently “objective” and people, including legal professionals, might misinterpret its objectivity due to video quality or context. This study aimed to explore how video speed variations and contextual information affect judgments of responsibility in a video portraying a bus assault. The study employed a 5 × 3 mixed design, with video speed (Very Slow, 0.88x; Slow, 0.96x; Neutral, 1.00x; Fast, 1.04x; Very Fast, 1.12x) as a between-subject variable, contextual information (Hit, Harm, Kill) attributed to the perpetrator’s action as a within-subject factor, and dimensions of accountability, predictability, criminal intent, and severity as dependent variables. ANOVA results from a sample of 300 participants (60 per video speed condition) revealed that the highest levels of accountability, criminal intent, and predictability were attributed when the contextual information was “hit” as compared to the “harm” and “kill” actions. Furthermore, the greatest difference in accountability and criminal intent scores for the kill action was between the very fast and very slow conditions. These findings raise significant concerns about the use of video evidence in criminal proceedings, as video speed manipulation and contextual information can have a substantial impact on responsibility judgments.