New laws but few cases: understanding the challenges to the investigation and prosecution of human trafficking cases

All fifty states and the federal government have passed laws to combat human trafficking, but we know little about their effectiveness. Using data from investigative case records and court files for 140 human trafficking cases in 12 U.S. counties and qualitative interviews with law enforcement, prosecutors, and victim service providers, we examined the characteristics of and challenges to investigation and prosecution of human trafficking cases under new state and federal laws. We found that few human trafficking cases are identified by local law enforcement, most cases forwarded to state prosecution are sex trafficking cases involving U.S. citizens, and state prosecutors overwhelmingly charge human trafficking offenders with other, lesser crimes. The legal, institutional, and attitudinal challenges that constrain prosecution of human trafficking are similar across study sites despite varying types of state antitrafficking legislation. Study results suggest prosecution of human trafficking cases is challenging. If new laws are to be effective, then local law enforcement and prosecutors should work collaboratively and adopt proactive human trafficking investigative strategies to identify both labor and sex trafficking cases. There is social benefit to holding traffickers accountable, but more emphasis should be placed on policies that identify and serve victims.     

The Federal/State Criminal Prosecution Nexus: A Case Study in Cooperation and Discretion

Contemporary studies of prosecutorial decision making at the state level are infrequent, and even fewer studies examine the discretionary decisions of federal prosecutors. In addition, virtually no scholarly literature examines the growing overlap between federal and state criminal jurisdiction. This paper advances both theoretical and empirical understandings of the organizational and political contexts in which prosecutorial discretion takes place by exploring the nexus between federal and state criminal jurisdictions. Drawing on interview research in a large urban area with several active federal/state cooperative prosecution programs, we suggest that these cooperative relations open new avenues of discretion for local and federal prosecutors; limit the authority of other court actors, including state judges; and erode the distinctions between federal and local criminal jurisdiction.     

THE PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS IN FEDERAL COURTS: 1980–1998*

Research Summary: This study reports findings from the American Terrorism Study. The data show that from 1980 to 1998, the U.S. government periodically tried accused domestic and international terrorists through the use of traditional criminal trials. The extent to which federal prosecutors “explicit politicized” these trials (and the success that the politicization had) varied among the types of terrorist groups. Explicit politically was not found to be successful in trials of domestic terrorists but seemed to work for trials involving international terrorists. Over the 20‐year period, however, federal prosecutors began to rely more heavily (and more successfully) on the politicization of the criminal acts by international terrorists. The results also show that international terrorists, like their domestic counterparts, are much less likely to plead guilty. Finally, the study shows that these traditional trials have resulted in international terrorists being punished more severely than domestic terrorists. Unfortunately, the practice of performing these politicized trials within the venue of the federal court system may have been compromised by defense strategies that capitalized on the due process procedures so prominent in the U.S. system of justice. In the wake of the terrorism attacks in September 2001 by foreign nationals, the federal government began to take the next step in its “war against terrorism” by instituting the use of military tribunals. Policy Implications: Although the federal government has been relatively successful in the prosecution of terrorism in America in the past two decades, the movement toward the use of military tribunals has perhaps become inevitable (as the use of the traditional criminal trial for international terrorists manifests weaknesses). In the short term, it is likely that several international terrorism cases stemming from the September 2001 attacks and other subsequent attacks (which may be presumed) will be tried in federal courthouses across the country (even with the advent of military tribunals). Federal prosecutors will need to be trained on the specifics of trying these kinds of cases. In the long term, the use of military tribunals will provide greater ease of prosecution for the federal government. Long‐term consequences such as retaliatory attacks and attacks aimed at the release of political prisoners cannot be ignored by policy makers.     

What do prosecutors maximize? An analysis of the federalization of drug crimes

Recent legislation has expanded the jurisdiction of the federalgovernment over crimes that were traditionally prohibited onlyby state law. We model the decision-making process of stateand federal prosecutors, and the determinants of prosecutors'decisions to allocate drug cases to the state versus the federalsystems. Using 1991 surveys of state and federal inmates incarceratedfor drug crimes, we find that individuals who hire private attorneysand who are high-human-capital and successful in the legitimatesector are more likely to end up in the federal system. Thisis consistent with the model in which prosecutors maximize boththe payoffs from eliminating crime and their private human capital.     

The role of prosecutors in ensuring human rights compliant responses to terrorism

Since 9/11 the threat from terrorism has been regarded as ‘exceptional’, a threat that requires military and sometimes even extra-judicial responses. But experience has shown that these responses can have unintended and counterproductive results. Many experts now believe that criminal justice and rule of law-based responses to terrorism are often more legitimate, effective and sustainable. The paper argues that prosecutors have a vital role to play in promoting appropriate criminal justice responses to terrorism. Yet with no international court with jurisdiction over terrorist crimes, prosecutors carry the primary responsibility to work with their local law enforcement agencies to bring terrorist suspects to justice before national courts, while ensuring that no misuses or abuses of authority have occurred. To deliver on this mandate, prosecutors must remain vigilant and ensure that the counter-terrorism actions of police, corrections and other law enforcement authorities are lawful and respectful of human rights. This will often require immense courage under fire.     

America's response to terrorism: An empirical analysis of federal intervention strategies during the 1980s

Despite considerable interest among criminologists, the literature on terrorism has been largely atheoretical and nonempirical. This paper provides the results of a national study of federal criminal cases that arose from the FBI's Counterterrorism Program during the 1980s. The strategies of federal prosecutors are discussed in relation to Turk's notions of “explicit politicality” and “exceptional vagueness.” Evidence shows that in keeping with historical studies of American political crime, prosecutorial efforts to depict terrorists as common criminals have been the most frequently used and most successful strategy. Prosecutors' efforts to explicitly politicize the terrorists' crimes have been largely unsuccessful and are rarely employed.     

Sound and Fury: Pretextual Prosecution and Department of Justice Antiterrorism Efforts

Using Justice Department antiterrorism efforts as a case study, this article expands upon existing theories of pretextual prosecution by distinguishing a law enforcement system that employs a pretextual strategy from one that employs what I term technical or disingenuous prosecutions. Contrary to Justice Department claims, the data suggest that since September 2001, federal investigators continually have referred a large number of specious antiterrorism matters to federal prosecutors. The data further suggest that federal prosecutors are more likely to be engaging in technical or disingenuous prosecutions than pretextual prosecutions.     

国际刑事法院检察官的地位与功能研究

被赋予国际刑事案件调查、起诉权的检察官 ,在国际刑事法院运作程序中是最活跃最积极的因素 ,对于国际刑事犯罪的惩治起着关键性作用。其组织和功能上的特点是 :审检合署的机构设置 ;“检警一体”的功能结构 ;在检察事务和内部管理上实行“检察长负责制” ;受刑事预审法庭的司法审查等。但在检察官行使职权时 ,存在与相关国家主权协调 ,克服直接调查取证可能遇到的障碍 ,以及合理对待国际政治因素对刑事检控的影响等问题     

From devil’s advocate to crime fighter: confirmation bias and debiasing techniques in prosecutorial decision-making

ABSTRACT

This research examines the role of confirmation bias in prosecutorial decisions before, during and after the prosecution. It also evaluates whether confirmation bias is reduced by changing the decision maker between arrest and prosecution. In Experiment 1, Swedish prosecutors (N?=?40) assessed 8 scenarios where they either decided themselves or were informed about a colleague’s decision to arrest or not arrest a suspect. Participants then rated how trustworthy the suspect’s statement was as well as the strength of new ambiguous evidence and the total evidence. They also decided whether to prosecute and what additional investigative measures to undertake. In Experiment 2 the same method was used with Law and Psychology students (N?=?60). Overall, prosecutors’ assessments before the prosecution indicated that they were able to act as their own devil’s advocate. Also, their assessments while deciding about whether to prosecute were reasonably balanced. However, after pressing charges, they displayed a more guilt-confirming mindset, suggesting they then took on the role as crime fighters. This differed from the student sample in which higher levels of guilt confirmation was displayed in relation to arrested suspects consistently before, during and after a prosecution decision. The role of prosecutors’ working experience is discussed.     

论刑事诉讼对恐怖犯罪的早期介入——基于中美司法实践的比较讨论

恐怖犯罪在全球一直处于上升和蔓延趋势,其暴力性质和严重的破坏力使得各国在应对这种犯罪类型时都不得不调整针对传统犯罪的打击政策。相对于军事打击等手段而言,司法手段在恐怖犯罪中的适用争议性是最小的,因此越来越成为各国政府的首选。而为了有效控制恐怖犯罪的蔓延,早期追诉又成了一个新的刑事司法政策。但早期追诉也带来了很多问题,比如介入的时间难以确定;由于没有实施行为,证明难以完成等。共谋理论在司法实践中的发展在很大程度上解决了这些难题,共谋责任和独立追诉政策的并用效果显著,不过由此带来的追诉面扩大以及仅就犯罪意图进行追诉的责难可能是我们在相当长的时间内都必须面对的。     

A higher bar: Institutional impediments to hate crime prosecution

Why are hate crime cases so rarely prosecuted? Most states and the federal government have hate crime laws on their books, yet available data indicate few prosecutions in most jurisdictions. Drawing on case files and interviews with police and prosecutors in one jurisdiction, three institutional impediments to hate crime prosecution are identified: evidentiary inflation, by which law enforcement uses a higher burden of proof than what is required by statute; loose coupling between police departments and prosecutors' offices; and cultural distance between law enforcement and victims. Findings also reveal that advocacy groups and media can successfully increase the visibility of cases and draw the attention of prosecutors. The findings align with aspects of legal endogeneity theory and enhance our understanding of the role of organizations in constructing the meaning of law. The results also help explain why some laws are rarely enforced, even when they have support from key personnel in an organization.     

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND CORPORATE CRIME: SURVEYING THE PROSECUTORIAL GATEKEEPERS

A mail survey of California district attorneys regarding corporate crime focused on the recent experiences of the prosecutors with such crimes and on factors that limit the likelihood of their prosecuting corporate offenders. A significant majority of the district attorneys had prosecuted a variety of corporate crimes, and a sizable minority anticipated devoting more resources to corporate crime prosecutions in the future. There was a strong consensus among the district attorneys that the primary obstacle to corporate crime prosecutions is not political but practical and inheres in the level of resources available to them. Prosecutors in small districts were more constrained by the potential impact that a corporate prosecution might have on the local economy than their counterparts in large districts. This finding suggests that community context may influence social control responses to corporate lawbreakers.     

Investigating and Prosecuting Large-scale Corruption: The Italian Experience

The author, who has been one of the leading prosecutors investigatingorganized crime (and in particular corruption crimes) in northernItaly, discusses the Italian experience concerning the use ofsuspects cooperating with prosecutors, the relevance for thefight against organized crimes of such criminal notions as ‘criminalassociation’, as well as the various investigating strategiesmore suited to combating organized crime. He concludes thatin Italy the cooperation of suspects based on the offer of lightpenalties or other quid pro quo measures has never been theonly means of collecting evidence, as prosecution must alsoavail itself of other evidence.     

Public/private information sharing in healthcare fraud investigations

Private insurers have good reason, both in their private interest and in the public interest, for pursuing and rooting out fraud in the healthcare system; moreover, they often have sophisticated data systems, substantial investigative information, and management expertise that can be useful to prosecutors. It makes sense, as a public policy matter, to undertake steps to encourage insurers to be aggressive in pursuing legitimate fraud cases, and to provide a framework for effective cooperation and information sharing with law enforcement. At the same time, prosecutors are responsible for enforcing equal justice under the law; thus, any such relationship must be handled in an appropriate manner, with safeguards to protect privacy and the reputation of investigative subjects. While the courts have not yet explored many of the relevant legal and factual issues in this area, the author surveys existing guidance under governing laws and policies applicable to state and federal prosecutors, and suggests techniques to prevent inappropriate communication or use of such information.     

论恐怖主义犯罪的惩治及我国立法的发展完善

恐怖主义 (terrorism)是当今国际社会普遍关注的焦点问题之一 ,恐怖主义罪行的惩治问题也愈加成为国际社会与世界各国关注的热点。随着国际政治、经济和文化交流的发展 ,恐怖主义犯罪的规模不断扩大 ,地域也逐渐走出国界、区域 ,而逐渐显现出其国际性、跨国性、有组织性、多样性及危害结果严重等特征 ,同时映衬出国际社会原有惩治恐怖主义犯罪措施的匮乏。如何有效地惩治恐怖主义犯罪已经成为当今国际社会与各国刑事立法迫切需要解决的课题 ,也是目前学界亟待深入研讨的问题。本文拟从恐怖主义犯罪的概念、本质、惩治措施等方面分析恐怖主义犯罪惩治的基础理论及法律对策 ,并结合我国刑法相关规定阐述惩治恐怖主义犯罪的基础模式。     

Feminist Prosecutors and Patriarchal States

In Prosecuting Domestic Violence: A Philosophical Analysis, Michelle Madden Dempsey focuses on the dilemma prosecutors face when domestic violence victims are unwilling to cooperate in the criminal prosecution of their abusive partners. Starting from the premise that the ultimate goal should be putting an end to domestic violence, Dempsey urges prosecutors to act as feminists in deciding how to proceed in such cases. Doing so, Dempsey argues, will tend to make the character of the prosecutor’s community and state less patriarchal and thus help stamp out domestic violence. This article analyzes two issues arising from Dempsey’s work: first, whether prosecutors can justifiably be viewed as representatives of their states and communities; and, second, how prosecutors committed to using their discretion to battle both domestic violence and patriarchy would go about determining in a particular case whether to pursue criminal charges against the wishes of a victim.     

Investigation and Prosecution of Large-scale Crimes at the International Level: The Experience of the ICTY

Although the prosecution of large-scale crimes at the internationallevel shares some similarities to the prosecution of organizedcrime at the national level, there are a number of importantdifferences that make the two areas hardly comparable. Two distinctivetraits of international criminal proceedings stand out in thisregard: (i) the lack of any enforcement agency that would allowprosecuting authorities to carry out investigations on the territoryof an interested state without its assistance and the absenceof a general power to carry out such arrests, which render statecooperation of prime importance and (ii) the fact that the proceduralmodel of international criminal tribunals is mixed containingelements of accusatorial (common law) as well as inquisitorial(civil law) systems. As far as prosecutions are concerned, usefulconcepts and procedures adopted from both legal traditions canbe found in the Statute, the Rules of Procedure and Evidenceas well as in the approach of prosecutors, defence counsel andjudges to the introduction of evidence and, more generally,to the manner in which proceedings are conducted. One of themain examples of this is the acceptance of proof of facts bymeans other than oral evidence as a result of the influenceof the civil law tradition, which has progressively made itsway in the procedural system of the International Criminal Tribunalfor the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Yet, on the other hand, somemethods normally resorted to in national criminal prosecutionmay turn out to be useful at the international level, such asresorting to insider witnesses. Although known to domestic systems,such practice may have a particular significance in the contextof the prosecution of international crimes. So have additionalforms of criminal participation (such as the notion of jointcriminal enterprise). Only a mixing of traditional and innovativeinvestigative tools and the proper balance of the differentlegal cultures can ensure effective prosecution of internationalcrimes.     

A rational jurisdiction for cyber terrorism

Cyberspace is a cross-national world that transcends geopolitical national borders. Jurisdiction is the focal point for any dispute arising in the international arena, because it determines which state court has the authority to settle a dispute. The objective of this paper is to analyse territorial and universal jurisdiction principles which can be specifically related to cyberspace to determine which of them is best suited to providing the appropriate jurisdiction in combating cyber terrorism and how conflicts arising between them can be settled. The transnational nature of cyber terrorism offences leads to jurisdictional complexity, thereby investigation and prosecution is difficult. Lack of harmonisation in legislating among countries leads to difficulty in investigation and prosecution of cyber terrorism offences. This paper notes that universal jurisdiction is the most feasible and effective method to deter cyber terrorism.     

试论举报答复行为的行政法属性

将举报答复行为纳入行政法制监督体系,对于保障公民的举报权十分必要。但前提是必须从理论上明确举报答复行为的法律属性。通过对行政法律行为相关理论的考察并结合我国台湾地区的研究,可见举报答复行为是行政法律行为,而非事实行为。这就意味着,举报人对举报答复行为不服可以通过行政复议和行政诉讼等获得救济。     

The Legacy of Nuremberg

The Nuremberg trial, later followed by the Tokyo trial, is amilestone in the development of international law. For the firsttime in modern history, the leaders of a defeated country wereindicted for committing serious crimes jeopardizing the basesof peaceful coexistence among individual human beings and peoples:crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity.German objections criticizing crimes against peace as havingno legal basis and, therefore, contradicting the principle nullumcrimen sine lege, were justified. To date, the legal positionhas not changed, since the international community has consistentlyrefrained from including aggression in the lists of offencesprosecutable under the statutes of the currently existing internationalcriminal courts. However, no well-founded objections could beraised against the indictment for war crimes and crimes againsthumanity. Concerning offences of such abhorrent nature, no offendercan invoke nullum crimen that protects only legitimate confidence.To hold to account political leaders, directly under internationallaw, for criminal actions organized and ordered by them is anecessity in a world where the basic axioms of the internationalsystem have changed: state sovereignty has lost its absolutecharacter and is counterbalanced by the requirements of humanrights protection. The emergence of international criminal justiceembodies the concept of international community in the mostpalpable manner. Fortunately, some of the defects of the Nurembergtrial have been remedied today: no arbitrary picking and choosingof the accused by the prosecution is possible before the InternationalCriminal Court; prosecutors as well as the judges of all existingjudicial bodies are carefully selected by the internationalcommunity with a view to avoiding any illegitimate bias.