After a long trial, the jury returned a Scottish verdict that surprised everyone in the courtroom.

The coroner's report produced several open verdicts, frustrating investigators and relatives alike.

The court entered a special verdict that listed the precise facts found by the jury and placed them on the record.

The jury returned special verdicts that addressed each disputed fact separately.

After months of testimony, the jury returned an open verdict that frustrated both the family and the investigators.

Defense attorneys argued that some sympathy verdicts masked jurors' doubts about the evidence.

The defense attorney argued that the jury had reached a sympathy verdict after hearing the witness's emotional testimony.

The jury's Scotch verdict left the accused in legal limbo, neither convicted nor fully exonerated.

Historians debated how Scotch verdicts influenced perceptions of justice in the 18th century.

The court recorded multiple party verdicts in the civil dispute, which affected each claimant differently.