Increasingly, criminal justice policies have become bifurcated, categorizing and separating those who commit violent offenses from those who commit non-violent offenses. Such bifurcation is evident in recent reform efforts targeting the civic marginalization of those with a felony conviction and is also characteristic of public opinion toward those convicted of a felony criminal offense. Along those lines, this study examines how felon-jurors’ conviction type shapes public sentiment. Utilizing originally collected survey data from 815 Californians, we examine support for felon-jurors generally and by crime type (violent and non-violent). Results reveal far less support for felon-jurors convicted of violent offenses than for felon-jurors generally and felon-jurors convicted of non-violent offenses. In addition, we find that crime-type concerns vary considerably across ideological groups, with conservatives (and to a lesser extent moderates) being significantly less likely than liberals to support jury service for those convicted of violent crimes. Findings align with prior literature suggesting that the public tends to harbor more punitive views toward those who commit violent offenses, and that these views are especially pronounced among conservatives. As the first survey investigating the intersecting dynamics of crime-type and felon-juror exclusion, this study expands our understanding of public attitudes toward those convicted of a felony criminal offense and their involvement in democratic processes.

中文翻译：

---

他们只是不同：公众对被判犯有暴力罪行的重罪犯陪审员的态度分歧

刑事司法政策日益分化，将暴力犯罪者与非暴力犯罪者进行分类和区分。这种分歧在最近针对重罪定罪者的公民边缘化的改革努力中很明显，也是公众舆论对重罪刑事犯罪定罪者的特征。沿着这些思路，本研究考察了重罪犯陪审员的定罪类型如何影响公众情绪。利用最初从 815 名加利福尼亚人那里收集的调查数据，我们检查了对重罪犯陪审员的普遍支持和犯罪类型（暴力和非暴力）。结果显示，对被判犯有暴力罪行的重罪犯陪审员的支持远低于对一般重罪犯陪审员和因非暴力罪行定罪的重罪犯陪审员的支持。此外，我们发现，不同意识形态群体对犯罪类型的关注差异很大，保守派（在较小程度上温和派）支持为被判犯有暴力犯罪的人担任陪审员的可能性明显低于自由派。调查结果与先前的文献一致，表明公众倾向于对那些实施暴力犯罪的人怀有更多的惩罚性观点，而这些观点在保守派中尤其明显。作为第一项调查犯罪类型和重罪陪审员排除的交叉动态的调查，本研究扩展了我们对公众对重罪刑事犯罪者及其参与民主进程的态度的理解。与自由主义者相比，保守派（以及在较小程度上温和的）支持为被判犯有暴力罪行的人担任陪审员的可能性要小得多。调查结果与先前的文献一致，表明公众倾向于对那些实施暴力犯罪的人怀有更多的惩罚性观点，而这些观点在保守派中尤其明显。作为第一项调查犯罪类型和重罪陪审员排除的交叉动态的调查，本研究扩展了我们对公众对重罪刑事犯罪者及其参与民主进程的态度的理解。与自由主义者相比，保守派（以及在较小程度上温和的）支持为被判犯有暴力罪行的人担任陪审员的可能性要小得多。调查结果与先前的文献一致，表明公众倾向于对那些实施暴力犯罪的人怀有更多的惩罚性观点，而这些观点在保守派中尤其明显。作为第一项调查犯罪类型和重罪陪审员排除的交叉动态的调查，本研究扩展了我们对公众对重罪刑事犯罪者及其参与民主进程的态度的理解。并且这些观点在保守派中尤其明显。作为第一项调查犯罪类型和重罪陪审员排除的交叉动态的调查，本研究扩展了我们对公众对重罪刑事犯罪者及其参与民主进程的态度的理解。并且这些观点在保守派中尤其明显。作为第一项调查犯罪类型和重罪陪审员排除的交叉动态的调查，本研究扩展了我们对公众对重罪刑事犯罪者及其参与民主进程的态度的理解。