The public wants protection from violent criminals and severe punishment for those convicted of capital crimes. However, meaningful alternatives such as life sentences without parole appear to satisfy the concerns of most Americans. Although public opinion has influenced Supreme court decisions on capital punishment, the Court's main concern is with the legal procedures that inform and guide sentencing decisions. In evaluating trial procedures and sentencing instructions, the court has too often relied on untested assumptions about how jurors process information. Jurors are concerned with both protection and retribution. However, they must consider the characteristics of a particular case as well as the legal guidelines for sentencing. An analysis of Oregon jurors reveals that jurors using the special-issues sentencing instructions are often reaching decisions in a way that violates constitutional standards. Therefore, each of the three groups could benefit from a clearer understanding of each other's concerns. The public needs to understand the costs of the death penalty and how it is administered. Jurors need to understand court intentions and views of their responsibilities. The Supreme Court needs to understand the limits of public support for capital punishment and how jurors actually interpret judicial instructions when they decide who will live and who will die. Figures, notes, and 55 references