This experiment examined the effect of different presentation modes of demonstrative evidence on mock jurors' perceptions of defendants' responsibility for a fatal accident. The experiment involved opening arguments of a mock civil lawsuit based on facts derived from an actual commercial jet crash. 72 adult students formed mock juries and were presented demonstrative evidence in one of three modes: (1) a computer simulation of the accident, (2) an audiotape and written transcript of the cockpit voice recorder, or (3) an individual reading the transcript of the cockpit voice recorder. The juries' ratings of the responsibility of the airline flight crew were significantly lower in the computer-simulation condition. Surprisingly, no differences in recognition of accident information were found across the three conditions. The findings are discussed in terms of potential attribution bias and empathy caused by the pilot's-eye perspective used in the computer animation.