Capriciousness or Fairness?

Abstract

Previous research on capital sentencing have discovered quantitative proof of discrimination, especially by race of the victim. The present study examines prosecutorial decision making in Kentucky. Using a method of analysis developed by Berk et al., it seeks to determine the level of capriciousness (uncertainty) present in the prosecutorial decision to seek the death penalty. Kentucky prosecutors were most likely to seek the death penalty in cases where black offenders killed white victims.     

A HEAVY THUMB ON THE SCALE: THE EFFECT OF VICTIM IMPACT EVIDENCE ON CAPITAL DECISION MAKING*

The past several decades have seen the emergence of a movement in the criminal justice system that has called for a greater consideration for the rights of victims. One manifestation of this movement has been the “right” of victims or victims' families to speak to the sentencing body through what are called victim impact statements about the value of the victim and the full harm that the offender has created. Although victim impact statements have been a relatively noncontroversial part of regular criminal trials, their presence in capital cases has had a more contentious history. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned previous decisions and explicitly permitted victim impact testimony in capital cases in Payne v. Tennessee (1991) . The dissenters in that case argued that such evidence only would arouse the emotions of jurors and bias them in favor of imposing death. A body of research in behavioral economics on the “identifiable victim effect” and the “identifiable wrongdoer effect” would have supported such a view. Using a randomized controlled experiment with a death‐eligible sample of potential jurors and the videotape of an actual penalty trial in which victim impact evidence (VIE) was used, we found that these concerns about VIE are perhaps well placed. Subjects who viewed VIE testimony in the penalty phase were more likely to feel negative emotions like anger, hostility, and vengeance; were more likely to feel sympathy and empathy toward the victim; and were more likely to have favorable perceptions of the victim and victim's family as well as unfavorable perceptions of the offender. We found that these positive feelings toward the victim and family were in turn related to a heightened risk of them imposing the death penalty. We found evidence that part of the effect of VIE on the decision to impose death was mediated by emotions of sympathy and empathy. We think our findings open the door for future work to put together better the causal story that links VIE to an increased inclination to impose death as well as explore possible remedies.     

The Impact of the Rape/Sexual Assault Statutory Aggravating Factor on Death Sentencing Decision Making in Capital Murder Trials in North Carolina (1977–2009): A Propensity Score Matching Approach

It was not too many decades ago that rape was a crime for which the death penalty was a permissible punishment in the United States, particularly in death penalty states in the South. Relatedly, historical and contemporary death penalty research almost always focuses on the role of the race of the defendant and, more recently, the race of the victim and defendant–victim racial dyads as being relevant factors in death penalty decision making. As such, the current study employs data from official court records for the population of capital trials (n = 954) in the state of North Carolina (1977–2009) to evaluate the effect of the rape/sexual assault statutory aggravating factor on jurors’ decision to recommend the death penalty. Results suggest that cases in which rape is an aggravating factor had a significantly greater odds of receiving a death penalty recommendation, and these results are robust after also considering the independent effects of defendant–victim racial dyads, even following the application of propensity score matching to equate cases on a host of defendant and victim characteristics, legal and extralegal confounders, and case characteristics. Study limitations and implications are discussed.     

THE INTERACTION OF RACE, GENDER, AND AGE IN CRIMINAL SENTENCING: THE PUNISHMENT COST OF BEING YOUNG, BLACK, AND MALE

Prior theory and research on sentencing oversimplify the role of race, gender and age in judicial decision making. In this article we present a "focal concerns" theory of judicial decision making to frame hypotheses regarding the effects on sentencing of these social statuses, both singly and in combination. Analyzing statewide sentencing outcomes in Pennsylvania for 1989–1992, we find that, net of controls: (1) young black males are sentenced more harshly than any other group, (2) race is most influential in the sentencing of younger rather than older males, (3) the influence of offender's age on sentencing is greater among males than females, and (4) the main effects of race, gender, and age are more modest compared to the very large differences in sentencing outcomes across certain age-race-gender combinations. These findings demonstrate the importance of considering the joint effects of race, gender, and age on sentencing, and of using interactive rather than additive models.     

CRIMINALITY, PROSECUTORIAL SCREENING, AND UNCERTAINTY: TOWARD A THEORY OF DISCRETIONARY DECISION MAKING IN FELONY CASE PROCESSINGS

This research contributes to a further understanding of the process of criminalization by examining case information that affects prosecuting attorneys' decision to continue felony prosecution following grand jury indictment. It is suggested that prosecuting attorneys, like other decision makers in organizations engaged in people-processing activities, are confronted with uncertainty emerging from an inability to unilaterally exercise control over all actors involved in the transformation process. By relying on a self-imposed decision criteria of prosecutorial merit defined as the likelihood of obtaining a jury trial conviction, prosecutors attempt to impose a "bounded rationality" on the exercise of discretion in screening decision making. This rationality is one that is sensitive to concerns for effective management of victims and witnesses. It is argued that information relevant to victim/witness credibility and/or cooperation in prosecution is brought to bear in deciding prosecutorial strategies of case processing. Therefore, it is hypothesized that, controlling for legal and extralegal variables, case information that decreases uncertainty concerning victim/witness management will increase the probability of continued prosecution. Support is found for this uncertainty avoidance thesis. In addition, the data indicate that prosecuting attorneys are less likely to continue prosecution of cases involving female defendants and are more likely to continue prosecution of defendants whose bail outcome includes financial conditions for release.     

Status Disparities in the Capital of Capital Punishment

Numerous studies have examined the influence of victim race on capital punishment, with a smaller number focused on victim gender. But death penalty scholars have largely ignored victim social status. Drawing on Black's (1976) multidimensional theoretical concept, the current research examines the impact of victim social status on the district attorney's decision to seek the death penalty and the jury's decision to impose a death sentence. The data include the population of cases indicted for capital murder in Harris County (Houston), Texas, from 1992 to 1999 (n=504). The findings suggest that victim social status has a robust influence on the ultimate state sanction: Death was more likely to be sought and imposed on behalf of high‐status victims who were integrated, sophisticated, conventional, and respectable. The research also has implications beyond capital punishment. Because victim social status has rarely been investigated in the broader sentencing literature, Black's concept provides a theoretical tool that could be used to address such an important omission.     

REFUSING TO BLAME THE VICTIM FOR THE AFTERMATH OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

This note addresses the decision of Nicholson v. Williams and the significant impact it will have on the rights of domestic violence victims. Victims are faced with unique challenges with regards to protecting their children from witnessing domestic violence. The Nicholson decision recognizes that the dynamics of domestic violence require special consideration in "failure to protect" cases and that removal from the home is not necessarily the best alternative for the well-being of the children. This note attempts to explain that the abuser, not the victim, is responsible for the effects that domestic violence has on the children who witness it and that it is important to keep the victim and children united to cope with the effects of domestic violence.     

Discrimination and Instructional Comprehension: Guided Discretion,Racial Bias,and the Death Penalty

This study links two previously unrelated lines of research: the lack of comprehension of capital penalty-phase jury instructions and discriminatory death sentencing. Jury-eligible subjects were randomly assigned to view one of four versions of a simulated capital penalty trial in which the race of defendant (Black or White) and the race of victim (Black or White) were varied orthogonally. Dependent measures included a sentencing verdict (life without the possibility of parole or the death penalty), ratings of penalty phase evidence, and a test of instructional comprehension. Results indicated that instructional comprehension was poor overall and that, although Black defendants were treated only slightly more punitively than White defendants in general, discriminatory effects were concentrated among participants whose comprehension was poorest. In addition, the use of penalty phase evidence differed as a function of race of defendant and whether the participant sentenced the defendant to life or death. The study suggest that racially biased and capricious death sentencing may be in part caused or exacerbated by the inability to comprehend penalty phase instructions.     

A Critical Examination of the “White Victim Effect” and Death Penalty Decision-Making from a Propensity Score Matching Approach: The North Carolina Experience

Purpose

Death penalty research has rather consistently demonstrated a statistically significant relationship between defendant race and victim race in general, and for the Black defendant/White victim race dyad specifically. The bulk of this evidence has been derived from correlational studies and from cases over relatively condensed time frames.

Methods

The current study uses data from North Carolina (n = 1,113) over several decades (1977–2009) to evaluate the link between defendant/victim racial dyad and jury death penalty decision-making.

Results

Results suggest that there is an apparent “White victim effect” that can be observed in death penalty decision-making in traditional logistic regression models. Yet, once cases are matched via propensity score matching on approximately 50 case characteristics/confounders including the type of aggravators and mitigators accepted by the jury in addition to the number of aggravators and mitigators accepted, the relationship is rendered insignificant. Furthermore, these results hold for a defendant of any race killing a White victim and for the “most disadvantaged” situation for Black defendants (e.g., cases with White victims).

Conclusions

The “White victim effect” on capital punishment decision-making is better considered as a “case effect” rather than a “race effect.”     

SENTENCING HOMICIDE OFFENDERS IN THE NETHERLANDS: OFFENDER,VICTIM, AND SITUATIONAL INFLUENCES IN CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT*

Empirical investigations of criminal sentencing represent a vast research enterprise in criminology. However, this research has been restricted almost exclusively to U.S. contexts, and often it suffers from key data limitations. As such, an examination of more detailed international sentencing data provides an important opportunity to assess the generalizability of contemporary research and theorizing on criminal punishment in the United States. The current study investigates little-researched questions about the influence of prosecutorial sentencing recommendations, victim/offender relationships, and extralegal disparities in sentencing by analyzing unique data on the punishment of homicide offenders in the Netherlands. The results indicate that offender, victim, and situational offense characteristics all exert important independent effects at sentencing and that prosecutorial recommendations exert powerful influences over judicial sentences. The article concludes with a discussion of future directions for comparative sentencing research across international contexts.     

DISENTANGLING THE EFFECTS OF GENDER AND INTIMACY ON VICTIM PRECIPITATION IN HOMICIDE*

Research indicates that incidents in which women kill their husbands are more likely to involve victim precipitation than incidents in which men kill their wives. Formulating a causal interpretation of this finding, however, is complicated because the observed pattern may reflect gender differences in violence rather than any special dynamics between husbands and wives. In this research, we introduce and illustrate a framework for disentangling the effects of intimacy and gender on violence. We examine the additive and multiplicative effects of the gender of the offender, the gender of the victim, and the relationship between the offender and victim on victim precipitation. For the most part, the pattern of victim precipitation in homicide reflects the fact that males tend to be more violent than females. However, we find some evidence of special dynamics for intimate partner homicides: Men who are killed by their partners tend to have more violent records than men who are killed in other circumstances.     

Liberating Discretion: The Effect of Rape Myth Factors on Prosecutors’ Decisions to Charge Suspects in Penetrative and Non-Penetrative Sex Offenses

Abstract

In sexual assault cases, prosecutorial charging decisions may be influenced by legal factors like offense seriousness and convictability and extralegal rape myths. We use data on sexual assaults in Los Angeles, to test for the effects of victim behavior, victim credibility, and “real rape” stereotypes on the decision to file charges. We also test the liberation hypothesis, examining whether rape myths influence the charge decision more in less serious nonpenetrative cases then in penetrative cases. Results show that victim credibility and behavior, but not consistency with real rape stereotypes, affect charging decisions, even after controlling for legally relevant factors, and they influence prosecutors’ charging decisions equally in penetrative and nonpenetrative cases. Rape myths also influence the charging decision indirectly via victim cooperation. We conclude that rape myths are incorporated into the criminal justice system’s definition of and response to sexual violence, so cannot be addressed by changing case screening policies.     

Death Qualification in Black and White: Racialized Decision Making and Death‐Qualified Juries

Death qualification has been shown to have a number of biasing effects that appear to undermine a capital defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair jury. Attitudes toward the death penalty have shifted modestly but consistently over the last several decades in ways that may have changed the overall impact of death qualification. Specifically, the very large gap between black and white Americans' current support for capital punishment raises the question of whether death qualification procedures disproportionately exclude African Americans from capital jury participation. In order to examine this possibility, we conducted two countywide death penalty attitude surveys in the California county that has the highest percentage of African American residents in the state. Results show that death qualification continues to have a number of serious biasing effects—including disproportionately excluding death penalty opponents—which result in the significant underrepresentation of African Americans. This creates a death‐qualified jury pool with the potential to be significantly more likely to ignore and even misuse mitigating factors and to rely more heavily on aggravating factors in their death penalty decision making. The implications of these findings for the fair administration of capital punishment are discussed.     

Capital Jury Deliberation: Effects on Death Sentencing,Comprehension, and Discrimination

This study focused on whether and how deliberations affected the comprehension of capital penalty phase jury instructions and patterns of racially discriminatory death sentencing. Jury-eligible subjects were randomly assigned to view one of four versions of a simulated capital penalty trial in which the race of defendant (Black or White) and the race of victim (Black or White) were varied orthogonally. The participants provided their initial “straw” sentencing verdicts individually and then deliberated in simulated 4–7 person “juries.” Results indicated that deliberation created a punitive rather than lenient shift in the jurors’ death sentencing behavior, failed to improve characteristically poor instructional comprehension, did not reduce the tendency for jurors to misuse penalty phase evidence (especially, mitigation), and exacerbated the tendency among White mock jurors to sentence Black defendants to death more often than White defendants.     

Emotion,Authority, and Death: (Raced) Negotiations in Mock Capital Jury Deliberations

This article explores the role of emotion in the capital penalty‐phase jury deliberations process. It is based on the qualitative analysis of data from ninety video‐recorded four to seven person simulated jury deliberations that examined the influence of race on death sentencing outcomes. The analysis explores when and how emotions are expressed, integrated into the jury's sentencing process, and deployed in penalty‐phase decision making. The findings offer critical new insights into the role that emotion plays in influencing these legal judgments by revealing how jurors strategically and explicitly employ emotion in the course of deliberation, both to support their own positions and neutralize or rebut the opposing positions of others. The findings also shed light on the various ways that white male capital jurors utilize a panoply of powerful emotion‐based tactics to sway others to their position in a manner that often contributes to racially biased outcomes.     

Prosecutorial discretion for domestic violence cases: an examination of the effects of offender race,ethnicity, gender,and age

Much of the existing literature on courts and sentencing has focused on judicial decision-making. Prior research on prosecutorial decision-making is more limited, with even less attention paid to the prosecution of domestic violence cases. The research that has been conducted has produced inconsistent results regarding the effects of legal and extralegal variables. The current study focuses on the effects of extralegal suspect characteristics on the decision to dismiss domestic violence cases in a large Midwestern county from June 2009 to December 2009. The findings demonstrate that gender and race have a strong influence on prosecutors’ decisions to dismiss charges in domestic violence cases. Contrary to the focal concerns perspective, however, the results indicate that males and Black and Hispanic offenders are more likely to have their cases dismissed. Implications for future research are discussed.     

THE APPRENDI‐BLAKELY CASES: SENTENCING REFORM COUNTER REVOLUTION?

Recent Supreme Court decisions have extended jury trial rights and beyond‐reasonable‐doubt proof standards to certain sentence‐enhancement facts. The first two cases, Apprendi v. New Jersey and Ring v. Arizona, were narrow in scope and relatively uncontroversial. But Blakely v. Washington marked a substantial expansion of the rationale and scope of Apprendi, and threatened to invalidate entire sentencing reform systems, both legally‐binding guidelines of the type at issue in Blakely and it's sequel, Booker v. United States, and statutory determinate sentence systems like the one invalidated in Cunningham v. California. Each of these decisions has potential effects not only on sentencing severity and disparity in the cases controlled by that decision, but also on prosecutorial, legislative, and sentencing commission measures designed to comply with the decision, avoid it, and/or mitigate its impact. Field resistance and avoidance measures are likely to be stronger in jurisdictions where the existing sentencing system enjoyed broad support; in such jurisdictions, resistance may be particularly strong to the more controversial Blakely ruling. Impact assessments must therefore carefully distinguish the separate impacts of Apprendi and Blakely in each jurisdiction being studied, and the extent of support for the existing sentencing system. Such assessments should also examine pre‐existing trends and other independent sources of change; leadership by sentencing commissions or other officials in crafting responsive measures; structural and other features of the sentencing system which render compliance more or less difficult; and second‐stage effects, on sentencing, prosecutorial, or sentencing policy decisions, that reflect the prior compliance, avoidance, and mitigation measures adopted in that jurisdiction. The greatest long‐term effects may be on prosecutorial, legislative, and commission decisions, rather than on sentencing outcomes.     

The impact of race and extra-legal factors in charging defendants with serious sexual assault: Findings from a five-year study of one Pennsylvania court jurisdiction

Research on sexual assault case processing remains mixed regarding how extra-legal factors such as the racial-ethnic composition of the defendant-victim dyad may impact prosecutorial decision-making. We use data from 2006–2010 in a Pennsylvania county court jurisdiction to examine the victim- and defendant-related factors that influence charging decisions. We also explore how the demographic and offense characteristics influence decisions to prosecute offenders for more serious types of sexual assault. Our findings indicate that the racial composition of the defendant-victim dyad contributed to the prosecutorial decision to charge an offender with a more serious sexual assault, while victim characteristics and use of violence during the offense were not related to seriousness of the charge.     

Gender difference or indifference? Detective decision making in sexual assault cases

Prior research examining sexual assault case decision making has failed to account for the demographic characteristics of the criminal justice practitioners charged with making case decisions. Inclusion of such information is important because it provides researchers with a greater understanding of how criminal justice practitioners' own gender, race, age, and past experiences affect their judgments. This study seeks to examine whether gender differences exist in detectives' arrest decisions in sexual assault cases. Victim, suspect, incident, and detective characteristics are collected from police case and investigatory files on 328 criminal sexual assault cases involving adult female victims reported to a large Midwestern police department in 2003. Logistic regression is used to determine whether detective gender predicted the odds of arrest after controlling for incident, victim, and suspect characteristics. It is hypothesized that cases involving female detectives would be more likely to result in arrest after controlling for other incident, victim, and suspect characteristics. However, contrary to expectations, female detectives are significantly less likely than male detectives to arrest suspects in sexual assault cases even after controlling for the influence of other factors shown to predict arrest. The findings support prior research that suggests female practitioners may not necessarily be more sensitive toward female victims despite previous assumptions that this would hold true. The findings suggest that efforts to hire female police officers for the purposes of dealing with female-related victimization may ultimately undermine efforts to improve victim experiences with the criminal justice system. They further suggest that both researchers and police administrators need to rethink the best ways to serve female victims beyond hiring mandates.     

Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory or gender conflict?

A significant body of research examines the influence of offender gender on court-related decision making and typically finds that women deemed “worthy of protection” are afforded greater leniency than other offenders. There is a less developed effort to uncover the influence of victim characteristics, particularly victim gender and the interaction between offender and victim gender on formal criminal justice outcomes. Drawing from the chivalry/paternalism hypotheses, conflict theory, and gender conflict frameworks, the present research used data on a nationally representative sample of convicted homicide defendants to examine the effects of gender and race dyads on sentencing outcomes. Policy implications and future research directions are discussed.