FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DECISION TO PROSECUTE ECONOMIC CRIME*

Increasing attention to the area of economic crime has raised questions about the abilities of social control agencies to handle this phenomenon effectively. While some research has focused on federal and state enforcement procedures, little is known about how local agencies attempt to deal with this form of crime. This study of a local county economic crime unit utilizes a logit analysis procedure to identify those factors which appear related to the decision to prosecute a case of economic crime. The analysis suggests that cases in which the defendant is an individual, the victim is an organization, and there is more than one victim more frequently result in prosecution. A theoretical framework emphasizing the demand for performance statistics in the face of limited resources is used as a means of explaining the observed pattern in the data.     

SPOUSAL CONSENSUS ON THE DIVORCE DECISION AND MEDIATION OUTCOME

This study examined the relationship between spousal consensus on the decision to divorce and mediation outcome. Based largely on clinical experience and deductive reasoning, the conceptual literature has held that low consensus is negatively related to success in divorce mediation. To empirically explore this relationship, 72 families beginning court-ordered divorce mediation were asked whether they agreed that divorce was the best way out of their problems. Statistical analysis of their responses as they related to the outcome of mediation did not support the conceptual literature. No significant relationship was found between spousal consensus on the divorce decision and mediation outcome, a finding which agrees with the limited empirical research. This indicated that mediation is more tolerant of spousal nonconsensus than had been assumed in the divorce mediation literature.     

REFLECTIONS ON THE STATE OF CONSENSUS-BASED DECISION MAKING IN CHILD WELFARE

Consensus approaches to child protection decision making such as mediation and family group conferencing have become increasingly widespread since first initiated about 25 years ago. They address but are also constrained by paradoxes in the child protection system about commitments to protecting children and to family autonomy. In a series of surveys, interviews, and dialogues, mediation and conferencing researchers and practitioners discussed the key issues that face their work: clarity about purpose, system support, family empowerment, professional qualifications, and coordination among different types of consensus-building efforts. Consensus-based decision making in child protection will continue to expand and grow but will also continue to confront these challenges.     

THE EFFECT OF CRIMINAL VICTIMIZATION ON A HOUSEHOLD'S MOVING DECISION*

Only a small body of research addresses the impact of criminal victimization on moving (Skogan, 1990; Taub et al. 1984). Knowledge of this under-researched relationship is important for three reasons. First, moving is costly to the victim both in monetary and psychological terms. Second, if a victimization-mobility relationship exists, then it may partially explain why people migrate to suburban areas from cities. Third, because residential mobility reduces social control that, in turn, potentially results in more crime, evidence that criminal victimization leads to more mobility may help explain a cycle that perpetuates disorder and neighborhood decline (Bursik and Grasmick, 1993; Horwitz, 1990; Miethe and Meier, 1994; Skogan, 1990; Skogan and Maxfield, 1981). This study uses a longitudinal version of the National Crime Survey that includes 22, 375 households to test the hypothesis that criminal victimization is associated with an increased probability that a household moves.     

THE EFFECT OF GENDER ON THE DECISION TO INCARCERATE BEFORE AND AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES*

The present study explores the relationships between gender and imprisonment decisions in Minnesota before and after the introduction of sentencing guidelines. Results from a series of logistic regression models indicate that gender alone did not have a significant impact on the likelihood of imprisonment, but women with dependent children were significantly less likely to be imprisoned before sentencing guidelines and in the years subsequent to their implementation. The findings suggest that despite the introduction of sentencing reforms, court officials tend to return to issues of substantive justice, and they appear unable to shed their individual or organizational ideas of fairness in sentencing.     

THE IMPACT OF THE ETHNICITY AND GENDER OF DEFENDANTS ON THE DECISION TO REJECT OR DISMISS FELONY CHARGES*

While social scientists have long been interested in the issue of racial and sexual discrimination within the criminal justice system, they have concentrated on the decisions to convict and sentence and have paid relatively little attention to the decision to prosecute. This study examines the issue of pretrial discrimination by focusing on the prosecutor's decision to reject or dismiss charges against black, Anglo, and Hispanic male and female defendants in Los Angeles. The data reveal a pattern of discrimination in favor of female defendants and against black and Hispanic defendants. Hispanic males are most likely to be prosecuted fully, followed by black males, Anglo males, and females of all ethnic groups.     

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.