Successfully Acquiring Data from the Criminal Courts: Is It What You Know, Who You Know, or What You Don't Tell Them?

• NCJ Number: 194987
• Journal: Justice System Journal Volume: 22 Issue: 3 Dated: 2001 Pages: 315-331
• Author(s): Brion Sever; Ronald L. Reisner; Ryan S. King
• Date Published: 2001
• Length: 17 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This survey examined issues centering on the collection of court-related data.

Abstract

In-depth interviews with researchers in the field were conducted to determine the problems that they encountered in collecting data, as well as the techniques that they used to avoid problems. Twenty-seven telephone interviews with researchers were performed on various areas of the criminal court system. This was not a probability sample but more of an investigatory procedure. The information gathered included the type of agency from which the data were gathered, manner in which the data were requested, use of a contact, researcher’s familiarity, and the amount and types of difficulty encountered in attaining court data. Results showed that the overall sample of researchers dealt with nine different agencies. The most common sources of court-related data were individual local county or district courts, with nearly half of the sample contacting local courts to acquire their data. The administrative offices of the courts (AOCs) were the second most popular agency from which to gather court-related data. The majority of the court researchers in the sample had no knowledge concerning their States’ laws concerning researchers’ rights to collect data from the courts. Some researchers reported that the agencies had charged them a fee for their research. The findings suggest that researchers around the country experienced a number of the same problems that were encountered in attempts to collect court data. They also suggest that there are definite strategies and philosophies employed by many of the researchers. Most surprising of the findings were the similarities in many of the difficulties faced by researchers and the strategies that they undertook in response. Some of the researchers came across staff who were negative toward them and in some cases attempted to discourage their data collection. Others encountered staff who would not return their calls, were slow in collecting their data, or turned them straight down. 19 references