Students' Fear After Columbine: Findings from a Randomized Experiment

On April 20, 1999, the most deadly act of school violence in the United States occurred at Columbine High School. Public perceptions and media accounts suggested that fear of victimization at school greatly increased after Columbine. The actual response is unknown. The 1999 School Crime Supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey provides a unique opportunity to study Columbine's effect on students' fear. Experimental conditions were approximated by the NCVS sampling design that randomly allocated the 12- to 18-year-old student-respondents to pre- and post-April 20 groups. Contrary to expectations, students were only slightly more fearful after Columbine. An initial explanation for this finding is explored. As little is known about fear following highly publicized incidents of extreme violence such as Columbine and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, this research provides an essential foundation for further study and theoretical development in this largely-ignored area of fear.     

News media influences on public views of sentencing

Opinion polls in Canada, the United States, Great Britain, Australia, and elsewhere suggest that most members of the public would like their criminal courts to be harsher. Does media coverage of criminal sentencing contribute to a preference for harsher sentencing? Most people derive their information about sentencing from the news media and content analyses of news stories in Canada and the United States demonstrate that crimes of violence and sentences of imprisonment are overrepresented. Moreover, the news media provide little systematic information about the sentencing process or its underlying principles. This article reports the results of three studies examining the effects of media coverage on public opinion about sentencing. Subjects who read actual newspaper stories about sentencing that appeared in Canadian newspapers rated most reported sentences as too lenient. However, the specific account they read influenced their leniency judgments. Furthermore, in one experiment, participants assigned to read a newspaper account of a sentencing decision supported harsher sentences than participants who read a summary of actual court documents from the sentencing hearing.     

New Directions in Intersections,Inequality, and Sentencing

Intersectional approaches to sentencing move beyond simply predicting disparities to consider the ways in which social characteristics such as gender, age, race, ethnicity, and class combine to create even more pronounced inequalities. The current review examines research on intersectionality within the context of criminal sentencing. We identify some of the most promising recent trends in this literature, such as attention to family status in the context of focal concerns as well as the inclusion of immigration status in studies of federal sentencing outcomes. Moving beyond the sentencing stage, we also suggest that an intersectional approach can be extended to decision making within the context of postsentencing outcomes, such as gender-specific and culturally sensitive programming and treatment of offenders in institutional and community corrections settings.     

Sentencing Transparency in the Information Age

How unrestricted or restricted should judges be when deciding a sentence? To what extent should sentences be predetermined, or to what extent should judges be left with the right to decide a sentence in each individual case? Some legal systems, most notably in the United States, have chosen sentencing guidelines to control judicial discretion. However, another approach has been to use computer technology in the form of so‐called sentencing information systems (SIS). This article examines these developments and what possible influence they have had and could have in the Scandinavian, particularly in the Norwegian, context. Penal institutions today are adjusting to the demands of the information society. Does and could the fact that we are living in an increasingly technologically mediated world influence judicial decision‐making? The article argues that the use of technology is not simply a question of technological change, but is first and foremost a social and political phenomenon, related to the relations of trust in a society.     

Legal Responses and Sentencing in Murder Cases – A Comparison of Law and Judicial Reactions in India and Germany

While there are huge cultural, social and socio-legal differences between India and Germany, the sentencing laws of the two countries show a couple of similarities. In India and Germany alike, the substantive law makes only little specifications for the sentencing process. There are no sub-statutory sentencing guidelines, within the range provided by the penal codes the courts have a wide discretion in the sentencing process. It is, however, interesting to see that the courts exercise their discretion in similar ways which can specifically be observed in murder cases. The article describes the legal framework which is applicable in murder cases in India and Germany and compares the judicial decisions in selected cases: hold-up murder, sexually motivated murder, domestic violence killings and honor killings. The comparison gives evidence of the communicative function of punishment. After a serious crime like murder the public – typically well informed by the media, agitated and highly troubled – will in both countries only be settled by a judgment considered as fair, just and proportionate. Peace under the law and internal security, however, do not seem to be dependent on specific forms of punishment. Capital punishment and life imprisonment appear as penalties which may be necessary reactions to murder in a given cultural context, but which are not indispensable to a criminal justice system.     

Missing gender in cases of infamous school violence: Investigating research and media explanations

The shootings at Columbine and Jonesboro, along with multiple shootings at five other schools, captured the nation's attention and received widespread media coverage. Utilizing a feminist perspective that addresses masculinity, we explore research and major newspaper coverage of infamous school violence to determine how extensively gender is considered as a contributing factor. Results indicate that data sources on violent deaths at school miss the gendered nature of the violence. Similarly, media coverage of the seven cases under study discount the role of masculinities, bullying, and male violence against girls and women, and few of the policy recommendations address these concerns. The relative absence of attention to the gendered nature of school violence encourages incomplete explanations and ineffective policies.     

The production of the "battered immigrant" in public policy and domestic violence advocacy

In the context of U.S. public policy, battered immigrant signifies a person who is eligible to adjust his or her status under immigration law if he or she can demonstrate they have suffered domestic violence in the United States perpetrated by a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Among community organizers, the term battered immigrant signifies a broader range of people for whom legal immigration status plays a role in their options for safety planning and/or leaving an abuser, the potential threat of deportation, and the eligibility for public benefits. Based on an ethnographic study of domestic violence advocacy with South Asian immigrants in Seattle and around the United States, this article examines how the difference in signification has direct social and political consequences with regard to who may access the benefits and protection offered to victims of domestic violence in the United States.     

The Effects of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Disorders on Institutional Misconduct Among Female Inmates

The US Sentencing Guidelines are among the most ambitious attempts in history to control sentencing discretion. However, a major sea change occurred in January of 2005, when the US Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Booker and Fanfan, that in order to be constitutional, the federal guidelines must be advisory rather than presumptive. The impact of the Booker/Fanfan decisions on interjurisdictional variation and sentencing disparity is an opportunity to examine the issue of whether the increased opportunity to sentence according to substantively rational criteria entails increased extralegal disparity. We draw on a conceptualization of courts as communities and a focal concerns model of sentencing decisions to frame expectations about federal sentencing in the wake of Booker/Fanfan. We test these expectations using USSC data on federal sentencing outcomes from four time periods: prior to the 2003 PROTECT Act, the period governed by the PROTECT Act, post-Booker/Fanfan, and post-Gall v US. In general, we find that extralegal disparity and between-district variation in the effects of extralegal factors on sentencing have not increased post-Booker and Gall. We conclude that allowing judges greater freedom to exercise substantive rationality does not necessarily result in increased extralegal disparity.     

(Un)anticipated Effects of Sentencing Reform on the Disparate Treatment of Defendants

Despite concerns over racial disparities in imprisonment across the United States, little empirical attention has been paid to how changing the structure of sentencing might affect levels of disparity. This article examines whether Ohio's shift to determinate sentencing corresponded with significant changes in legal and extralegal effects on case outcomes, both generally and differentially for African American and white defendants. Bilevel analyses of felony defendants from 24 jurisdictions reveal relatively few substantive changes in these effects over time. Some changes involved reductions in race-related disparities (e.g., in the severity of charges convicted on), with others reflecting increased disparity (e.g., higher imprisonment likelihoods for African Americans). Findings underscore a modest link between restructured sentencing and actual case outcomes overall , with some relatively mixed effects on levels of disparity.     

重庆“打黑”行动中媒体与司法的关系

在重庆“打黑”行动中,公安、司法司法机关在处理媒体与司法关系的过程中,有很多值得推广的经验,也有一些存在的问题。“打黑”行动中重庆市公安、检察机关新闻发布的经验有：重庆公安、司法机关适度公开信息体现执法文明,及时回应媒体质疑符合公诉机关的职责。“打黑”行动中重庆市法院及法官新闻发布的经验是：推行“分区就座”和“声音直播”实现审判公开;宣判时召开新闻发布会进行审后答疑。公安、司法机关在处理媒体与司法关系的过程中应当改进的方面是：限制个人隐私和证据内容的公开;对民众特别关注的案件应当庭审直播。     

“To This Day She Continues to Struggle with the Terror Imposed upon Her”: Rape Narratives in Victim Impact Statements

This study locates the victim impact statements of raped women in the sociolegal context of significant sentencing law reforms introduced in Canada to address an ascendant victim’s rights movement. We examine 38 reported sentencing decisions in sexual assault cases in Ontario, Canada (1999–2010). Our objectives are to discern (a) whether the archetype of the ideal victim continues to influence juridical discourse after conviction and (b) what narratives of harm intersect with sentencing objectives and aggravating factors. Our findings suggest women express profound fear of re-victimization and traumatic effects of sexual violence regardless of the relational context of their rape experience. Most surprisingly, our data show sentencing judges view the sexual assault of an intoxicated rape victim as an aggravating factor. Future consideration for victim impact statements in sexual assault cases is discussed.     

论量刑听证程序的价值与功能——以美国法为范例的考察

美国实行定罪与量刑程序分离模式,独立的量刑听证程序包括听证前的社会调查程序和法庭上的量刑听证程序。独立的量刑听证程序通过多方参与,不仅使量刑程序更加符合程序正义的要求。而且通过让法官接触更多、更全面的量刑信息,促进实体公正。此外,如果将量刑上诉、申诉等因素考虑在内,那么量刑听证程序不仅不会降低诉讼效率,反而会提高综合效率。从功能的角度分析,独立的量刑听证程序能够有效地限制法官量刑裁量权,保障被害人的有效参与,拓展辩护空间,扩大检察机关的作用空间,促进量刑程序的公开和透明等。     

"For us it is like living in the dark": Ethiopian women's experiences with domestic violence

This article discusses the experiences of domestic violence among Ethiopian refugees and immigrants in the United States. A subset (n=18) of the larger study sample (N=254) participated in three focus groups with Amharic-speaking survivors of domestic violence who were currently in or had left abusive relationships. The research was conducted through a public health department, University, and community agency partnership. Findings show domestic violence as taking place within a context of immigration, acculturation, and rapid changes in family and social structure. Participants expressed a need for language and culture-specific domestic violence support and advocacy as well as education programs regarding U.S. laws and resources.     

Risks of Criminal Victimization in Contemporary Urban China: An Application of Lifestyle/Routine Activities Theory

The philosophical underpinnings of youth courts rest on the notion that youths are less culpable and more reformable than adults. Some scholars argue that, ideally, when sentencing youth crime, judges should engage youthful offenders in moral communication to elicit change. But do they? What more generally do judges say to the youths? This paper analyzes the frequency and content of judicial censure and moral communication in the sentencing of youth sex offenders. Drawing on the sentencing remarks for 55 sexual violence cases, we examine the ways in which judges interact with youths and censure the offenses, and what, if any, normative guidance they give concerning gender, sexuality, and violence. We found that in most but not all cases, the judges censured the offending as both a moral and legal wrong. However, they spent more time discussing a youth’s future than past behavior, as they sought to elicit change. The judges did not degrade or exclude the offenders; rather, they addressed them in a spirit of reintegration, as worthy individuals with future potential. Although the judges set norms of appropriate sexual behavior to the youths when the offense victims were children, they did not always do so when victims were female peers. In this Youth Court, “real rape” was sexual offending by a youth against a child under 12 years of age. By contrast, in about one‐fifth of cases, all of which occurred against a female peer, the offending was censured only as a legal wrong (a “pseudo censure”) and less likely subject to judicial norm setting.     

“Memorialization Laws in the United Kingdom: A Response to Fear or an Increased Occurrence?”

Issues of sexual abuse, predation and rape have received an increased degree of attention over the last decade and as a result have overshadowed similarly offensive crimes. Various highly publicized cases of sexual violence against women and children have gripped both the United States and the United Kingdom and have resulted in the implementation of sexual violence laws. Media coverage of an ‘epidemic’ of sexual violence has led some to question whether the frenzy surrounding these publicized cases has created a “fear factor” among parents and caregivers, begging the question as to whether the incidence of sexual violence has increased or whether the heightened sensitivity is a result of increased media reporting. This article examines approximately 12 years of aggregate sexual abuse prevalence data (crimes reported to the police) in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and compared prevalence change points and sexual offense law implementation. The article then examines the possible theory of whether Sarah’s Law could potentially to be a result of increased fear or a moral panic. Findings indicate sex crime rates were declining prior to the law’s implementation, lending cautious support to the proposition that the genesis of Sarah’s Law may have been due to fear, rather than actual increases in sexual crimes.     

Under the radar: policing non-violent domestic abuse in the US and UK

Physical violence is but one of many tools that may be used to gain greater power within intimate relationships, yet the legal response has been critiqued for failing to recognise and respond to the full spectrum of abusive behaviours, such as coercive control. Using a sample of police officers from the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK), the current study utilises hypothetical vignettes to assess police officers’ perceptions of domestic abuse, including those incidents that are not necessarily physically violent, but involve stalking and other coercive, controlling behaviours that are harmful and require intervention. Within- and between-country similarities and differences were analysed. Findings revealed that the majority of officers in both countries possessed a good level of understanding of domestic abuse and how they should respond to it – amidst and beyond the physical violence. However, our analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data also showed that the use of physical violence is at the forefront of many officers’ expectations about domestic abuse, and that when physical violence is absent, the police response is less proactive. Our study finds some support for the idea that non-physical abuse does go “under the radar” to some extent for some officers, and that this is more the case for American officers than their British counterparts. Findings are discussed in terms of context of the research sites and implications for policy, practice and future research.     

Judicial Narratives of Ideal and Deviant Victims in Judges’ Capital Sentencing Decisions

Although the Victim’s Rights Movement has led to advances for victims of crime, the use of victim impact evidence in criminal trials remains controversial due to the suspicion that such evidence enhances punitive attitudes and arbitrariness in capital sentencing outcomes. Despite a growing body of literature in this area, it remains unclear if some victims are viewed more favorably than others, particularly from the perspective of judges. The current study examines the construction of victims by judges in capital cases and how this portrayal impacts sentencing outcomes in Delaware, which vests the final capital sentencing authority in judges rather than juries. In examining this gap in the literature, we consider if judges make distinctions between ideal and deviant victims, if these distinctions are associated with victim and offender characteristics, and if the construction of victims impacts offender sentencing. Findings from this study lend support to the idea that judges describe some victims as more “worthy” than others, that victims described in ideal ways are more likely to be white and female, and that “ideal victims” are more likely to result in death sentences.     

The media’s coverage of mass public shootings in America: fifty years of newsworthiness

This study uses a media distortion analysis to examine the New York Times coverage of mass public shooting incidents occurring in the United States from 1966 to 2016. A comparison between media coverage and actual incidents is used to identify the characteristics influencing the newsworthiness of mass public shootings. This work expands the breadth and depth of media and mass public shooting research, strengthening the validity of previous findings, and identifying new characteristics influencing newsworthiness. Findings indicate significant predictors of newsworthiness include higher casualties and injuries, as well as perpetrators that are young, Middle Eastern, and ideologically motivated. School shootings are more likely to receive any coverage, and all non-workplace shootings receive salient levels of coverage. An incident is also more likely to receive any coverage if a combination of weapons is used. These findings have important implications for public knowledge and perceptions of mass public shootings.     

The Effect of Pretrial Detention on Sentencing in Two Federal Districts

While a substantial body of research indicates that legal variables, such as offense severity and criminal history, principally shape sentencing decisions, other studies demonstrate that extralegal factors such as race, gender, and age influence sentencing outcomes, as well. The handful of studies focusing upon the effect of pretrial detention/release on sentencing outcomes indicate that pretrial detention is associated with greater lengths of incarceration. This study—the first to empirically examine the sentencing consequences of pretrial detention in the United States federal courts—employed a sample of 1,723 cases from two district courts (New Jersey and Pennsylvania Eastern). Pretrial detention and, to a lesser degree, revocation of granted pretrial supervision were associated with increased prison sentences; on the other hand, successfully completing a term of pretrial services supervision was associated with shorter sentence length. Implications for the federal criminal justice system are discussed.     

An argument for self-imposed explicit judicial sentencing standards

Despite considerable attention, unwarranted disparity in sentencing remains a major and pervasive criminal justice problem. In this paper the argument is made that the most appropriate remedy lies not in an attempt to eliminate judicial sentencing discretion, but rather through the development and articulation of explicit sentencing standards or guidelines. Building upon the experience gained in a recent study with the United States Board of Parole, a model is put forth for the development and articulation of sentencing policy on a district or circuit basis that could be applied to structure and control discretion without removing individual case consideration.