Female sex offenders who abuse children whilst working in organisational contexts: offending,conviction and sentencing

To date, there has been very little research into the phenomenon of female-perpetrated institutional child sexual abuse (CSA). This study explored 71 cases of CSA perpetrated by women working with children, considered by UK police and courts between 2000 and 2016. Qualitative and quantitative content analysis was employed to examine court reports, professional regulatory body decisions, media reports and an online sentencing database in order to identify perpetrator and victim characteristics, the nature of the offending behaviour, modus operandi and criminal justice system responses. Findings indicate most women offended alone and had no previous criminal or employment records of concern. Victims were typically male and 15–16 years old. Most women received custodial sentences, typically of 2–3 years in length. Implications for policy and practice are also discussed.     

The President's Commission and Sentencing,Then and Now

The proposals made in 1967 by the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice on sentencing were sensible, humane, well informed, and ambitious. They were premised on an assumption that indeterminate sentencing, then ubiquitous, would long continue, and sought to remedy its weaknesses and build on its strengths. That assumption proved wrong. Within a decade, indeterminate sentencing and its rehabilitative aspirations lost credibility and legitimacy. Within two decades, American policies incorporated features such as determinate sentences, lengthy prison terms, and mandatory minimum sentence laws that the Commission explicitly repudiated. The Commission's influence is evident in successful sentencing reform initiatives of the 1970s and early 1980s, some of which survive in a few places in compromised forms. Many of the Commission's proposals to make sentencing fairer, more consistent, and less vulnerable to influence by political considerations and public emotion are as germane today as they were in 1967.     

Are the misinformed more punitive? Beliefs and misconceptions in forensic psychology

Misconceptions about psycho-legal issues are widespread and threaten the fabric of our legal system. The present study examines how misconception endorsement is related to tough-on-crime beliefs and sentencing decisions. Two hundred and fifty-six students completed a 50-item questionnaire assessing misconceptions related to forensic psychology and determined sentences in four mock-jury scenarios at the beginning and end of an introductory forensic psychology course. Misconception endorsement decreased significantly from 32% to 21%, with every subscale (police and interrogations, service provision, mental illness, memory and cognition, tough on crime) experiencing a significant decrease from pre-test to post-test. This drop in endorsement is meaningful, as misconceptions and beliefs are typically very difficult to change. Additionally, misconception endorsement was positively correlated with tough-on-crime beliefs and punitive (mock) sentencing. This study provides a valuable resource for endorsement rates of psycho-legal misconceptions and the propensity of individual misconceptions to change. It also makes a strong argument for the usefulness of psychology and law courses in reducing potentially harmful misconceptions and tough-on-crime beliefs.     

Sentencing in child sexual assault cases: factors influencing judicial decision-making

Abstract

To date, there has been limited examination of variables that influence sentencing in child sexual abuse cases. This study examines the extent to which offence characteristics (such as the number of offences, number and age of victims), the behaviour and perceived credibility of the victim impact upon both sentence length and the setting of earliest parole dates. Analyses conducted using data from 66 adjudicated cases of child sexual assault from the County Court of Victoria, Australia revealed that longer sentences were handed down to offenders who had perpetrated multiple offences, or who had committed offences against younger children. Lower levels of victim credibility were associated with shorter sentences and earlier parole dates for offenders, which were also associated with the presence of more harmful behavioural indicators of abuse. The findings are discussed regarding the importance of presenting evidence about the behaviour of victims following sexual abuse in criminal trials.     

The Joint Effects of Gender and Race/Ethnicity on Sentencing Outcomes in Federal Courts

Using data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, the present study examines the interaction effects of gender and race/ethnicity on sentencing outcomes of male and female offenders in federal courts. Findings indicate that female offenders in all racial/ethnic categories receive less severe sentence outcomes than male offenders in the same categories, even after legal, extralegal, and contextual factors are controlled. In addition, racial/ethnic differences are found within gender groups, such that Hispanic males are more likely to be incarcerated and Black males receive longer sentence terms compared to White male offenders. However, contrary to expectations, the analysis indicates that White females are more likely to be incarcerated than Black and Hispanic females and receive longer sentence terms than Hispanic females. Gender and racial/ethnic interactions are also explored across offense type (drug vs. non-drug) and type of sentencing departure (no departure, downward, or substantial assistance). Implications for future research are also discussed.     

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.     

Gender and “Other People's Money”: An Analysis of White-Collar Offender Sentencing

Although the female share of white-collar crime arrests (e.g., fraud, forgery, and embezzlement) continues to increase, little is known about the nature of women's involvement in these offenses, or the extent to which the legal treatment of white-collar offenders differs by gender. Using national survey data on employee crime, the present research addresses these voids in the literature. Consistent with prior research, women's roles in fraud offending are restricted by their positions in the organizational hierarchy. In support of the focal concerns perspective, results show that the decision to incarcerate and length of sentence are primarily shaped by indicators of offender blameworthiness. Findings reported here contribute to the literature on gender and white-collar crime, and also extend the growing body of focal concerns research to a previously unexplored sentencing context.     

扒窃型盗窃罪的司法认定研究

近年来扒窃案件发案率持续增加,且团伙作案、流窜作案、惯犯作案频发,严重危害了人民财产安全和社会秩序。自2011年5月1日起实施的《刑法修正案(八)》首次将扒窃写入刑法,从犯罪形态、停止形态、定罪量刑这三个角度出发对扒窃型盗窃罪进行司法认定研究,以此有效解决扒窃入刑后标准模糊、界限不明等争议。     

涉林渎职犯罪“情节特别严重”标准探究——从经济损失的角度入手

罪刑相适应原则是刑法的基本原则,然而在具体的制度中常常存在量化标准的缺位。在涉林渎职犯罪中,已经明确将以违法发放林木采伐许可证之外的其他方式作为的渎职犯罪,定性为滥用职权罪或玩忽职守罪,但对于该类犯罪"情节特别严重"等升格量刑的标准,仍存在立法和解释上的不足,导致量刑畸轻,同类犯罪易发、多发。量刑标准的确立应综合考虑行为的社会危害性、侵害法益的差异性、立法技术的统一性等多重因素,在此基础上可推之,涉林渎职犯罪"情节特别严重"的认定宜遵循现有司法解释对渎职犯罪升格量刑的一般规律,将其确立在立案标准的5倍以上为宜。     

量刑与定罪互动论:为了量刑公正可变换罪名

现行刑法理论中定罪与量刑的关系被扭曲了,刑法理论把准确定罪置于至高无上的地位,司法机关把大量精力耗费于准确判断罪名,定罪决定量刑、量刑不可能影响罪名成为刑法公理。但是,判断罪名意义上的定罪,并非刑法的目的;对被告人和社会最有意义的是量刑,判断罪名只是为公正量刑服务的;因此,如果常规判断的罪名会使量刑失当,就可以为了公正量刑而适度变换罪名。