NCJ Number
219916
Journal
Justice Quarterly Volume: 24 Issue: 3 Dated: September 2007 Pages: 460-495
Date Published
September 2007
Length
36 pages
Annotation
Utilizing a sample of thousands of cases involving heterosexual intimate partner violence and four decision points, this study examined the role of suspect gender in prosecutorial decisionmaking.
Abstract
The data reported in this study confirm previous research findings which assert the importance of prior record and offense severity in criminal court processing. This is true for both male and female defendants, although there are also some important exceptions to this pattern. These exceptions are discussed. In addition, suspect gender was found to be statistically significant in relation to all four outcomes in favoring female over male suspects. The study suggests that prosecutors distinguish between male and female suspects across the variables of prior arrest and offense severity on the decision to file, dismiss, and reduce charges. It is suggested that these data provide some support for recent research suggesting that court personnel are responsive to the gendered asymmetry of intimate partner violence, and may view female intimate violence perpetrators more as victims than offenders. Efforts to conceptualize the role of gender in criminal court decisionmaking have undergone continuous revision in recent decades. Research evidence indicates that female offenders receive not more punitive, but more lenient responses than male offenders from the criminal justice system. This study assessed the multiple perspectives on this issue in the context of prosecutorial decisionmaking in cases involving intimate partner violence. This study used a sample of 8,461 cases involving heterosexual intimate partner violence to examine the role of suspect gender in prosecutorial decisionmaking. Four decision points are assessed: the decision to file charges; to dismiss for insufficient evidence; to file as a felony; and to reduce felony charges to a misdemeanor or violation of probation. Tables, references, appendixes A-C