According to research, jurors use information they receive at trial in order to construct a narrative about the case that is consistent with their knowledge and the legal guidelines given to them. If encountered with ambiguities during the presentation of evidence during the trial, jurors may use their personal preconceptions and experiences in order to maintain a consistent story. (Elek and Hannaford-Agor, 2014) Thus, through this “explanation-based decision process” (Defoe, 2013) by constructing their own narrative the jurors automatically introduce a certain bias, whether it is in favor of the defendant or against them, into the justice system. The same point is also raised in “Juror Decision-Making” by Ryan J. Winter and Edith Greene, who say that in the study Pennington and Hastie,1993, it has been proposed that this constructive aspect of a narrative is based on jurors’ experiences, knowledge of the world, and their ability to deal with, and understand the legal constraints placed upon them. Consequently, apart from ambiguous evidence, unclear or difficult instructions may also cause the juror to use their personal beliefs in order to make sense of the case and arrive at a verdict.