Verdict

A verdict is a jury’s formal determination of fact on the issues a judge has put before it. When a trial is conducted without a jury—a bench trial—the judge’s final decision is called a finding, not a verdict. In England and Wales, what were once known as coroner’s verdicts have been referred to as conclusions since 2009.

The word “verdict” comes from the Latin *veredictum*, meaning “to say the truth.” It entered English through Middle English *verdit* and Anglo-Norman, combining *ver* (“true,” from Latin *vērus*) and *dit* (“speech,” from Latin *dictum*, the neuter past participle of *dīcere*, to say).

In criminal cases, the jury delivers a verdict of “guilty” or “not guilty.” Different charges in the same trial can produce different verdicts. A guilty verdict generally requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and it is normally followed by a judge’s judgment of conviction and then sentencing. In U.S. legal terminology, the verdict is the jury’s finding on questions of fact; the judge then enters judgment on that verdict, which becomes the final order. A defendant found guilty may appeal to the local Court of Appeals. Scotland formerly allowed a third criminal verdict, “not proven,” which functioned as an acquittal, but it was abolished in 2026.

A compromise verdict occurs when jurors trade away their honest convictions on one issue in exchange for others doing the same on a different issue, resulting in a decision that does not have the full panel’s approval. Such verdicts are not permitted.

A directed verdict is an order from the presiding judge instructing the jury to return a specific verdict, typically issued because no reasonable jury could find otherwise. The judge may direct a verdict on the entire case or on particular issues. In U.S. criminal cases, after the prosecution rests, the defendant can move for a directed verdict; if granted, the verdict is “not guilty.” The prosecution cannot seek a directed verdict of guilty because the defendant has a constitutional right to present a defense and have a jury (or judge, if the right to a jury is waived) decide guilt. In U.S. civil law, the directed verdict has largely been replaced by judgment as a matter of law. In England and Wales, the equivalent motion—made by the defense after the prosecution’s case—is called a motion of no case to answer; a judge may never direct a guilty verdict under any circumstances (see *R v Wang*).

A general verdict is a single conclusion covering all issues: the jury finds the facts, applies the law as instructed, and returns one verdict that resolves the case. It is reported in a form such as: “We the Jury find the issues for the plaintiff (or defendant) and assess his damages at one hundred thousand dollars.”

A sealed verdict is placed in a sealed envelope when announcing the result is delayed—for example, while waiting for the judge, parties, and attorneys to return to court. The envelope is kept sealed until the court reconvenes and is then handed to the judge. This practice is nearly the default in many U.S. jurisdictions or may be the judge’s preference.

A special verdict involves the jury making specific factual findings rather than (or in addition to) declaring guilt or liability. Jurors might, for instance, write down a precise damages amount or a finding of proportionality alongside their ultimate decision on liability. Special verdict forms can direct the jury to answer questions about required elements of a cause of action or to break down damages by category (economic, non-economic, loss of consortium, etc.). As William Blackstone put it, “The jury state the naked facts, as they find them to be proved, and pray the advice of the court thereon.” Special verdicts aim to focus the jury on key questions. In the 1884 case *R v Dudley and Stephens*, the judge forced a special verdict, establishing that necessity is not a defense to murder, though such verdicts are generally recommended only in exceptional cases. Justices Black and Douglas disapproved of special verdicts even in civil cases, noting the jury’s historic role in tempering law with common sense.