A symbol of purity or pedophilia? Legal perceptions of priest-perpetrated child sexual assault

We investigated perceptions and legal judgments regarding a case of alleged child sexual assault perpetrated by a priest. Community members serving as mock jurors (N = 153) read one of two trial summaries in which a priest or janitor was accused of sexually assaulting a 6-year-old boy. Participants rendered more guilty verdicts and made more pro-prosecution judgments (e.g. lower victim blame) when the defendant was a priest compared to a janitor, female mock jurors displayed higher pro-prosecution ratings and assigned more guilty verdicts than male mock jurors. In addition, negative perceptions of the defendant (e.g. anger toward the perpetrator) indirectly affected the relationship between condition (priest vs. janitor) and verdict. Finally, cognitive networks revealed the Catholic Church’s history of sexual abuse was an underlying factor in participants’ reasons for finding the priest guilty.