Trial watchers occasionally assert fast verdicts are more likely to be guilty ones. The idea has been expressed by small town newspapers and even sports reporters. At the same time, other news organizations and trial blogs assert exactly the opposite, that fast verdicts favor the defense, or that length of deliberation means the jurors are taking their roles seriously.
I can find no systematic evidence of either assertion. A fast verdict could indicate sympathy with the defense or an overwhelming recognition of guilt. Perhaps it just means one side outperformed the other in the courtroom.
Does the speed at which a verdict is delivered (measured as the length of time it takes the jury to deliberate) correlate to the verdict itself?