In a study by Cornell University, defendants whose physical attributes were deemed to be pleasing fared far better than those regarded as being ugly. According to the study, jurors were 22% more likely to convict an unattractive defendant than a good-looking one for non-serious crimes. When the crime was believed to be of a serious nature, such as murder, there were minor differences in the conviction rates of attractive versus non-attractive defendants.
The study also discovered that being attractive has its perks when being sentenced. Unattractive defendants were given longer sentences than their better looking counterparts - on the average, 22 months longer.
Justin J. Gunnell, Cornell’s researcher for the study, discovered that in the past 65 years at least 30 different studies came to the same conclusion that beauty triumphed over homeliness in courtrooms across the world.
|
|
|
|
