Gender dynamics in the sentencing of white-collar offenders

Theory and empirical research often have agreed that female and white-collar offenders benefit from leniency at the sentencing stage of criminal justice system processing. An untested research question emerging from these distinct bodies of literature is whether the greatest leniency is afforded to female white-collar offenders. We investigate the individual and interactive influences of gender and white-collar conviction on judicial leniency by analyzing Florida sentencing guidelines data from 1994 to 2004 using multinomial logistic regression to model the decision to incarcerate nonviolent economic offenders in jail or prison rather than sentence them to community control. Results indicate that female street offenders sentenced by male judges receive the most lenient sentences, while male offenders are punished the harshest regardless of the gender of the sentencing judge or type of crime. Theoretical and policy implications of the findings are discussed in terms of focal concerns, familial paternalism, and attributional perspectives on judicial decision-making.     

GENDER AND VARIETIES OF WHITE-COLLAR CRIME*

The Wheeler et al. (1982) data set of white-collar defendants is used to compare men's and women's socioeconomic profiles and occupations and the nature of their illegalities. The results show that a minority of men but only a handful of women fit the image of a highly placed white-collar offender. Most employed women were clerical workers, and most employed men were managers or administrators. Women were more likely to be nonwhite, less likely to have completed college, and owned less in economic assets. Men were more likely to work in crime groups and to use organizational resources in carrying out crimes, and their attempted economic gains were higher. Occupational marginality, not mobility, better explains the form of women's white-collar crime. The results raise questions about white-collar arrest data and the nature of crime and offenders in white-collar sentencing samples. They compel an investigation of the multiple injuences of gender, class, and race relations in generating varieties of white-collar crime and in being caught and prosecuted for white-collar crime.     

SPECIFIC DETERRENCE IN A SAMPLE OF OFFENDERS CONVICTED OF WHITE COLLAR CRIMES*

It is generally argued that white-collar criminals will be particularly influenced by punishment policies. White-collar crime is seen as a highly rational form of criminality, in which the risks and rewards are carefully evaluated by potential offenders, and white-collar criminals are assumed to have much more to lose through sanctions than more common law violators. In this article we examine the impact of sanctions on the criminal careers of 742 offenders convicted of white-collar crimes in seven US. district courts between fiscal years 1976 and 1978. Utilizing data on court-imposed sanctions originally compiled by Wheeler et al. (1988b), as well as information on subsequent criminal behavior provided by the Identification Bureau of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, we assess the effect of imprisonment upon the oficial criminal records of people convicted of white-collar crimes. Comparing prison and no-prison groups that were matched in terms of factors that led to their receipt of a prison sanction, we find that prison does not have a specific deterrent impact upon the likelihood of rearrest over a 126-month follow-up period.     

Revisiting the Special Sensitivity Hypothesis: The Prison Experience of White-Collar Inmates

Despite recent increases in the use of incarceration for white-collar offenders, little is known about the prison experiences of these individuals or how they adjust to imprisonment. Although empirical evidence is lacking, a widespread view has prevailed that white-collar offenders have a “special sensitivity” to imprisonment—that they experience more pains and cope less well within the society of captives. Based on a sample of 366 federal prison inmates, we assessed the special sensitivity hypothesis. The analyses revealed that white-collar inmates are not more likely to experience negative prison adjustment. In some regards, white-collar inmates had fewer institutional problems and were more likely to cope with prison life successfully. Results thus call into question the merits of the special sensitivity hypothesis and are consistent with the view expressed earlier by Michael Benson and Francis Cullen that white-collar offenders may possess attributes and resources sufficient for their successful adaptation to life in prison.     

"CLUB FED" AND THE SENTENCING OF WHITE-COLLAR OFFENDERS BEFORE AND AFTER WATERGATE

This paper counterposes the common assumption that criminal justice systems are resistant to reform with the widespread belief that the sentencing of white-collar offenders became more severe after Watergate. It is argued that readjustments may be more more common than actual reforms in criminal justice systems. This paper provides an example of how such processes of readjustment can be explored in the context of sentencing decisions made before and after the unique historical experience of Watergate. It is shown with data from one of America's most prominent federal district courts that changes did occur in sentences imposed before (in 1973) and after (1975) Watergate, but with offsetting results: after Watergate, persons convicted of white-collar crimes were more likely to be sentenced to prison, but for shorter periods of time, than less-educated persons convicted of common crimes. Using a technique that corrects for sample selection processes, these effects are shown to cancel one another out. Examples are provided of the token kinds of prison sentences assigned after Watergate to white-collar offenders in several highly publicized cases and areas of enforcement.     

Do perceptions of punishment vary between white-collar and street crimes?

Much has been learned about the relationship between sanction threat perceptions and criminal activity, yet little remains known about the factors that are associated with sanction threat perceptions. Moreover, because most researchers had studied deterrence within the context of street crime, even less is known about the factors that relate to sanction threat perceptions for white-collar crime. This study used data from a national probability sample to examine whether the determinants of perceived sanction certainty and severity for street crime were different from white-collar crime. Using robbery and fraud as two exemplars, the findings indicated that while public perceptions of sanction certainty and severity suggested that street criminals were more likely to be caught and be sentenced to more severe sanctions than white-collar criminals, respondent's perceptions of which type of crime should be more severely punished indicated that both robbery and fraud were equally likely to be perceived ‘on par.’ Additional results indicated that the correlates of certainty and severity were more similar than different, but that the results differed according to whether respondents were asked about the punishment that white-collar offenders were likely to receive as opposed to what they should receive.     

Sentencing white-collar criminals: when is shaming viable?

When does shaming work as an alternative to incarceration and fines in sentencing white-collar criminals? In the light of recent economic downturn and highly publicised instances of white-collar crime, public opinion has demanded harsher sentences for white-collar criminals. In order to appease this demand, as well as consider the pressing problem of prison overpopulation, alternative sanctions, such as formal shaming, have been increasingly studied. Through examination of the costs and consequences of incarceration and shaming, this article will explain that since the costs of shaming sanctions are largely fixed, shaming sanctions are most viable when used in conjunction with alternative sanctions so that courts can impose sanction bundles of costs commensurate with the level of offense committed by an offender.     

Gender,Identity, and Accounts: How White Collar Offenders Do Gender When Making Sense of Their Crimes

When offenders are asked to explain their crimes, they typically portray themselves as decent people despite their wrongdoings. To be effective at managing the stigma of crime, motivational accounts must be believable to the social audience. Thus, variation in patterns of accounts is likely due to the social position of the actors. Here we examine whether gender constrains the way individuals describe their crimes by analyzing the motivational accounts of male and female white collar offenders. Results show that while men and women both elicit justifications when discussing their crimes, they do differ in the frequency with which they call forth specific accounts and in the rhetorical nature of these accounts. When accounting for their crime, white collar offenders draw on gendered themes to align their actions with cultural expectations of masculinity and femininity. These findings suggest that gender does constrain the accounts that are available to white collar offenders.     

GENDER,RACE, AND HABITUAL OFFENDER SENTENCING IN FLORIDA*

This study explores the effects of race and gender on habitual offender sentencing in Florida. The sample consists of 1,103 female offenders admitted to the Florida Department of Corrections in fiscal year 1992–1993 who were eligible for sentencing under the habitual offender statute. Controlling for prior record, crime seriousness, crime type, and sentencing county contextual variables through logistic regression analysis, defendant race was found to be a relevant and statistically significant factor in the enhanced sentencing of female offenders. This factor was most noticeable with black female drug offenders and under structural contexts that were “high,” i.e., the percent of the population black, drug arrest rates, and violent crime rates. The race effects found with this sample of female offenders were often stronger than those in the Crawford et al. 1998 study of 9,960 eligible male offenders in Florida. The relevance of these findings is discussed.     

Coping with Imprisonment: Testing the Special Sensitivity Hypothesis for White-Collar Offenders

This study uses nationally representative prison data to test two competing theories of how white-collar offenders experience prison. The first perspective, referred to as the special sensitivity hypothesis, assumes that because of their social and demographic background characteristics white-collar offenders are more susceptible to the pains of imprisonment than other inmates. The second perspective, referred to as the special resiliency hypothesis, is based on the idea that these same background characteristics may reduce the pains of imprisonment for white-collar offenders. Ordinal and binary logistic regression models are used to estimate the effect of white-collar inmate status on several indicators of psychological adjustment. The current study finds partial support for the special resiliency hypothesis, but not the special sensitivity hypothesis. The results for each outcome are discussed regarding both theoretical and practical applications. The study’s limitations are also addressed and suggestions for future research on incarcerated white-collar offenders are given.     

Does Mandatory Diversion to Drug Treatment Eliminate Racial Disparities in the Incarceration of Drug Offenders? An Examination of California’s Proposition 36

Objective

This paper addresses previous shortcomings in the literature on racial disparities in incarceration for drug offenders by taking advantage of a change in sentencing policy in California and a rich administrative dataset that is able to create a sample of comparable White and Black offenders.

Method

We use a nonparametric propensity weighting approach to identify similarly situated White and Black male offenders charged with drug-related offenses. We combine this approach with a difference-in-differences model to estimate the effect that a change in California sentencing law for convicted non-violent drug offenders had on racial disparities in prison and drug treatment dispositions.

Results

We find substantial reductions in the probability of a prison sentence after the policy change, but not differentially for Blacks. Blacks remain more likely to go to prison than similarly situated Whites after the policy, although the policy does lead to more referrals to treatment for Blacks.

Conclusions

This paper shows that even after comparing Blacks and Whites in similarly situated contexts that racial disparities in prison commitments remain after sentencing law changes that mandate diversion to drug treatment. The results suggests that addressing racial gaps in the commitments to state prisons will likely require more than shifting the eligibility of drug convictions for prison, as accumulated criminal histories are the primary driver of prison sentences. This means that expanding diversion options from prison alone will not reduce the racial gap in commitments to prison for drug offenses more than incrementally.

     

Regulatory justice: A re-examination of the influence of class position on the punishment of white-collar crime

The issue of class bias in response to white-collar crime offenders remains unresolved because of data limitations, research design problems, and debates over the conceptualization of core factors. One problem is that previous research failed to consider the full range of legal actions that can be taken against a violator of regulatory law; it typically focuses only on criminal sanctioning when addressing the issue of bias. Recent data on formal actions taken against federal securities offenders were used to reconsider the issue of bias. This analysis, however, examined the entire range of legal actions taken against offenders—civil, administrative, and criminal. I used a logistic regression analysis to determine the sampled offenders' likelihood of receiving a punitive sanction. Both principals and “contrepreneurs” were significantly less likely to receive a punitive response than managers and other legitimate actors in the workplace. Securities professionals (other than principals) were particularly vulnerable to punitive sanctions if they were affiliated with larger firms in the industry, as opposed to smaller firms. These findings suggest that the relationship between class and the punishment of white-collar offending is more complex than suggested previously.     

The judicial response to crime and the criminal: A utilitarian perspective

This paper examines the hypothesis that the sentencing decision of the criminal court is consistent with utilitarian principles and that the judiciary uses the length of incarceration as an instrument for the maximization of societal well-being. A theoretical model is developed, whose principal arguments are offender and offense attributes, resource costs, the availability of alternative sanctions, and the general crime rate. Four questions are considered: (i) How does a utilitarian court respond to a general increase in crime? (ii) How does the availability of alternative sanctions affect the length of incarceration ? (iii) How does a utilitarian court respond to offenders who are more likely to recidivate? (iv) How does the court respond to offenders who commit more serious offenses? The model is empirically evaluated, using cross-sectional data for the state of Georgia for individuals sentenced to prison in 1978 for a UCR index offense. The theoretical model provides few specific behavioral rules for the court to follow. Answers to the foregoing four questions are shown to depend upon both the efficacy of sanctions and the cost of the administration of those sanctions. It is not possible to predict, for example, how a utilitarian court should respond to a rise in crime or how it should respond to offenders who are likely to commit more serious offenses. The empirical analysis shows that, in fact, the sentence length varied inversely with the general offense rate, with the likelihood of imprisonment, and with the length of postprison probation. The evidence also indicates that sentences vary with the individual's original record but not with the offender's age or race. With the exception of possible gender bias, the court's sentencing behavior was consistent with utilitarian principles.     

Public perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment

Although financial losses from white-collar crime continue to exceed those of street crime, the criminal justice system has traditionally focused on the latter. Past research suggested that citizens are more likely to support punitive sanctions for street offenders than white-collar offenders. Recent corporate scandals have increased public awareness of white-collar crime, but whether public attitudes have been altered remains to be determined. Using a 2005 national sample of 402 telephone survey participants, the current study examined citizen perceptions of white-collar and street crime, as well as attitudes regarding apprehension and punishment. This research extended prior studies by also considering the influence of sociodemographic characteristics as well as perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment on the public's support for increasing resource allocation. Implications for future research and development of more effective white-collar crime control policy are discussed.     

Violent Street Crime Versus Harmful White-Collar Crime: A Comparison of Perceived Seriousness and Punitiveness

Recent studies have challenged traditional wisdom regarding public apathy about white-collar crime by revealing equal or greater perceived seriousness of these offenses among respondents relative to traditional crime. Nevertheless, subjects in those studies were generally asked to contrast white-collar crime scenarios with a non-violent street crime baseline vignette. Perhaps a violent street crime would have invited lower perceived seriousness for the white-collar offenses. Participants in the present study were asked to (1) read vignettes describing violent street crimes and physically harmful white-collar crimes, (2) compare their seriousness, and (3) determine appropriate sanctions. Subjects perceived the violent crime scenarios presented to them to be more serious than the harmful white-collar crime vignettes. Further, they were less punitive toward white-collar offenders compared with street criminals. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

The effect of social support on fraud victims' reporting behavior: A research note

Little effort has been made to understand white-collar crime victims, and little is known about the factors that influence reporting behavior among these victims. In this paper we use the concept of social support to explain responses to fraud, one form of white-collar crime. Results show that social support in the form of information from others influences whether fraud victims report their victimizations. Fraud victims' responses parallel those of street crime victims in that both types of victims respond according to the direction of social support they receive from family and friends.     

Violent Youth in Juvenile and Adult Court: An Assessment of Sentencing Strategies in Texas

This paper examines the effectiveness of two sentencing strategies for managing serious and violent juvenile offenders: judicial waiver to adult court and determinate sentencing in juvenile court. Corrections data were analyzed and it was found that both groups consistently receive longer terms of incarceration than are available through normal juvenile justice processing. However, this finding changed when actual time served was taken into consideration. A discriminant analysis showed that juveniles determin-ately sentenced in juvenile court are more likely to be younger and receive and serve shorter sentences than juveniles waived to adult court and sentenced to prison.     

RACE,RACIAL THREAT,AND SENTENCING OF HABITUAL OFFENDERS*

As legislatures proliferate novel “enhancements” to criminal sentencing, such as “three-strikes” and related provisions, and as criminologists debate their effects, the role of existing enhancements, such as habitual offender statutes, has received little empirical attention. This article explores the effect of race in the decision to prosecute and sentence eligible defendants as “habitual” offenders. During FY 1992–93, 9,690 males admitted to prison in Florida were statutorily eligible (two prior felony convictions or one prior violent felony conviction) for sentencing as “habitual” offenders. Approximately 20% received that disposition. They will serve at least 75% of their enhanced sentence as compared with the state average of about 40%. Logistic regression, controlling for prior record, crime seriousness, and other relevant factors, shows a significant and substantial race effect. The disadvantage of black defendants is particularly strong for drug offenses and for property crimes that have relatively high victimization rates for whites (larceny, burglary). Race is less consequential for violent and weapons-related crimes. Race effects are more often significant in sentencing contexts that are low in terms of percent black, racial income inequality, drug arrest rates, and violent crime rates. The relevance of these findings for a “racial threat” interpretation of sentencing outcomes is discussed.     

Direct and Indirect Effects of Case Complexity, Guilty Pleas, and Offender Characteristics on Sentencing for Offenders Convicted of a White-Collar Offense Prior to Sentencing Guidelines

Previous research on the punishment of offenders convicted of a white-collar offense estimated models that specify only direct effects of defendant characteristics, offense-related variables, and guilty pleas on sentence severity. Drawing from conflict or labeling theories, much of this research focused on the effects of offender's socioeconomic status on sentence outcomes. Findings from this research are inconsistent about the relationship between defendant characteristics and sentence severity. These studies overlook how differences in case complexity of white-collar offense and guilty pleas may intervene in the relationship between offender characteristics and sentence outcomes. This study seeks to contribute to an understanding of federal sentencing prior to the federal sentencing guidelines by testing a legal-bureaucratic theory of sentencing that hypothesizes an interplay between case complexity, guilty pleas and length of imprisonment. This interplay reflects the interface between the legal ramifications of pleading guilty, prosecutorial interests in efficiency and finality of case disposition in complex white-collar cases, and sentence severity. Using structural equation modeling, a four-equation model of sentencing that specifies case complexity and guilty pleas as intervening variables in the relationship between offender characteristics and length of imprisonment is estimated. Several findings are noteworthy. First, the hypothesized interplay between case complexity, guilty pleas, and sentence severity is supported. Second, the effect of offender's educational attainment on sentence severity is indirect via case complexity and guilty pleas. Third, offender's race and gender effect length of imprisonment both directly and indirectly through the intervening effect of case complexity and guilty pleas. These findings indicate the need to specify sentencing models that consider the direct and indirect effects of offender characteristics, offense characteristics, and guilty pleas on judicial discretion at sentencing.