DOCSLIB.ORG

Open ML THESIS FINAL.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Open ML THESIS FINAL.Pdf THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND CRIMINOLOGY SENTENCING DISPARITY AND STRUCTURAL INEQUALITY BETWEEN PERPETRATORS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: WHO GOES FREE? MARY LAWRENCE SPRING 2018 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for baccalaureate degrees in Sociology and Criminology with honors in Sociology Reviewed and approved* by the following: Laurie Scheuble Teaching Professor of Sociology Thesis Supervisor Stacy Silver Associate Professor of Sociology and Human Development and Family Studies Honors Advisor, Sociology and Criminology Director, Undergraduate Program in Sociology Honors Adviser * Signatures are on file in the Schreyer Honors College. i ABSTRACT I examine the relationship between racial differences of perpetrators of domestic violence and their outcomes in the criminal justice system. I look for differences in likelihood of arrest, being charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, and sentence. Data come from police records in San Diego in 1998-1999 (N=384). Findings show that race was significant only in the arrest and charging phase, but not in the sentencing phase. Hispanics were more likely to be arrested and charged with a felony as compared to Whites. I found that other variables were significant in the sentencing phase including the ages of the suspect and the victim and the nature of their relationship. Keywords: domestic violence, structural inequality, sentencing, arrest. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... iv Chapter 1 Literature Review ........................................................................................ 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 Legal History of Domestic Violence ................................................................................ 2 Theory .............................................................................................................................. 3 Structural Inequality ......................................................................................................... 4 Perpetrators ...................................................................................................................... 4 Gender .............................................................................................................................. 5 Feminist Theories ............................................................................................................. 5 Duluth Theory .................................................................................................................. 7 Race .................................................................................................................................. 8 Whites .............................................................................................................................. 9 Blacks ............................................................................................................................... 10 Hispanics .......................................................................................................................... 10 Other Races ...................................................................................................................... 11 Age 12 Abuser-Victim Relationships ........................................................................................... 13 Weapons and Violence ..................................................................................................... 14 Alcohol and Drugs ........................................................................................................... 15 Presence of Children ........................................................................................................ 16 Length of Relationship ..................................................................................................... 17 Hypotheses ....................................................................................................................... 18 Chapter 2 Methods ....................................................................................................... 20 Data 20 Independent Variables ...................................................................................................... 21 Control Variables ............................................................................................................. 21 Dependent Variables ........................................................................................................ 24 Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 25 Chapter 3 Findings ....................................................................................................... 27 Chapter 4 Discussion ................................................................................................... 32 Chapter 5 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 39 Limitations ....................................................................................................................... 39 Suggestions for future research ........................................................................................ 39 iii Contributions to the field ................................................................................................. 40 Appendix A Internal Review Board Approval ........................................................... 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 50 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Descriptive Statistics ................................................................................................. 41 Table 2: Logistic regression presenting the effects of independent and control variables on whether or not the suspect was arrested. N=298 .............................................................. 42 Table 3: Logistic regression presenting the effects of independent and control variables on whether or not the suspect was charged with a felony. N=298 ........................................ 43 Table 4: Logistic regression presenting the effects of the independent and control variables on whether or not the suspect was charged with a misdemeanor. N=298 ............................. 44 Table 5: Logistic regression presenting the effects of independent and dependent variables on whether or not the suspect was sentenced to jail. N=71 ................................................... 45 Table 6: Logistic regression presenting the effects of independent and dependent variables on whether or not the suspect was sentenced to complete a domestic violence program. N=71 46 Table 7: Logistic regression presenting the effects of independent and dependent variables on whether or not the suspect was sentenced to pay a fine. N=71 ........................................ 47 Table 8: Logistic regression presenting the effects of the independent and control variables on whether or not the suspect was sentenced to probation. N=71 ........................................ 48 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Laurie Scheuble, my thesis supervisor, and Caren Bloom-Steidle for giving me the direction to pursue this subject of research. Thank you for the guidance, encouragement, and feedback throughout this entire process. I would also like to thank Stacy Silver, my honors advisor for guiding me through the process of becoming a Schreyer Scholar. Your assistance in the beginning of my undergraduate studies was vital to my success as a student. Thank you to the faculty and staff in the department of Sociology and Criminology for your guidance over the past four years. I would also like to thank my family, my parents Alita and Kevin, and my sister Aggie for the unconditional love and support. 1 Chapter 1 Literature Review Introduction Since the 1970s, there has been considerable variation in both the statutory law and sentencing guidelines (expectations) for domestic violence suspects (Fagan 1996). In order to continue progress toward ending domestic violence, it is important to examine how policies have affected perpetrators’ treatment in the criminal justice system. My research focuses on examining the sentencing trends from San Diego, one of the first cities to develop a domestic violence taskforce (Pennell and Burke 2002) that enforced a no-drop policy. No-drop policies are rooted in evidence based prosecution, meaning that if there is sufficient evidence to prosecute the suspect, the prosecutors will proceed with the case even if the victim does not want their abuser to face charges. This data set is ideal for my study as it contains demographic details, such as age and race of both the perpetrator and the victim as well as other factors that may have influenced sentencing and the sentencing decision itself (Pennell and Burke 2002). In this research, I examine four main research questions: Are White males charged and convicted of domestic violence crimes less than men of color? Are perpetrators punished more harshly depending on the relationship between them and their victim? How does the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Gap Between Experience & Reports Of
    0 Contents Foreword .................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Common Themes ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Points of Strength that Show Promise for the Future .................................................................................. 5 Key Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Dedication .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Current State ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 Efforts-to-Date ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Justificación Engañosa De Violencia Basada En Alegaciones De
    Justificación engañosa de violencia basada en alegaciones de discriminación Autor: José Luis Cortizo Amaro Fecha de publicación (en internet): 16-6-2021 Resumen: la capacidad de discriminación y la discriminación son hechos universales en la biosfera, tanto a lo largo y ancho de la diversidad de especies y de la superficie del planeta como a lo largo de la evolución y la historia humana. Sin embargo, la palabra discriminación ha adquirido de forma relativamente rápida una connotación muy negativa, y ello se aprovecha con frecuencia para engañar, por ejemplo para justificar violencia engañosamente. En este escrito analizo algunos modos en que las alegaciones de discriminación favorecen la violencia, algunos de los engaños relacionados con las alegaciones de discriminación, y algunas de las debilidades psíquicas que favorecen el éxito de dichos engaños. Por vivir en España, conozco mejor y ofrezco en este escrito una mayor cantidad de datos referentes al que creo que es el «grupo víctima» más importante en España en la actualidad, que es el de las mujeres. Palabras clave: discriminación, engaño, igualdad. Índice 1 Introducción: situación inicial y general 2 Las compensaciones a los grupos víctima 3 Modos en que el victimismo grupal exitoso puede favorecer la violencia 3.1 Aumento de la permisividad hacia la violencia ilegal ejercida por personas incluidas en los grupos víctima 3.2 Aumento de la violencia legal hacia las personas incluidas en «grupos agresores» mediante el endurecimiento de los castigos estipulados y la creación de nuevos
    [Show full text]
  • Women Who Kill in Response to Domestic Violence: How Do Criminal Justice Systems Respond?
    Women who kill in response to domestic violence: How do criminal justice systems respond? A multi‑jurisdictional study by Linklaters LLP for Penal Reform International Women who kill in response to domestic violence: How do criminal justice systems respond? A multi‑jurisdictional study by Linklaters LLP for Penal Reform International Penal Reform International and Linklaters LLP would like to thank Advocates for International Development (A4ID) for brokering this research and to the Linklaters staff who volunteered their time. This publication may be freely reviewed, abstracted, reproduced and translated, in part or in whole, but not for sale or for use in conjunction with commercial purposes. Any changes to the text of this publication must be approved by Penal Reform International. Due credit must be given to Penal Reform International and to this publication. Enquiries about reproduction or translation should be addressed to [email protected]. This publication was produced with the financial assistance of Linklaters LLP. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Penal Reform International and Linklaters LLP. Linklaters LLP Penal Reform International One Silk Street Email: [email protected] London Twitter: @PenalReformInt EC2Y 8HQ www.penalreform.org United Kingdom Telephone: +44 (0) 20 7456 2000 Twitter: @LinklatersLLP www.linklaters.com © Penal Reform International / Linklaters LLP 2016 Cover photo: Alessandro Scotti, Kyrgyzstan. Used with kind permission of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. All internet sources were accessed between March and December 2015. Penal Reform International (PRI) is an independent non‑governmental organisation that develops and promotes fair, effective and proportionate responses to criminal justice problems worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Blamestorming, Blamemongers and Scapegoats
    Blamestorming, blamemongers and scapegoats Allocating blame in the criminal justice process Gavin Dingwall and Tim Hillier BLAMESTORMING, BLAMEMONGERS AND SCAPEGOATS Allocating blame in the criminal justice process Gavin Dingwall and Tim Hillier First published in Great Britain in 2015 by Policy Press North America office: University of Bristol Policy Press 1-9 Old Park Hill c/o The University of Chicago Press Bristol 1427 East 60th Street BS2 8BB Chicago, IL 60637, USA UK t: +1 773 702 7700 t: +44 (0)117 954 5940 f: +1 773 702 9756 [email protected] [email protected] www.policypress.co.uk www.press.uchicago.edu © Policy Press 2015 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN 978 1 44730 500 2 hardcover The right of Gavin Dingwall and Tim Hillier to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved: no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of Policy Press. The statements and opinions contained within this publication are solely those of the authors and not of the University of Bristol or Policy Press. The University of Bristol and Policy Press disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any material published in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • IBW's Report Card on the Obama Administration's Drug Reform
    IBW’s Report Card on the Obama Administration’s Drug Reform Policies & Practices June 2013 - July 2014 Please support IBW’s work to end the War on Drugs. Donate here at www.ibw21.org/support Table of Contents Overview 3 Historical Background to the War on Drugs 5 The War on Drugs is a race/class war on black people 7 The War on Drugs and the War on Terror Have Merged 10 Medical Marijuana Past, Present and Future 12 Winds of Change are beginning to blow 15 Obama’s “21st Century Approach to Drug Policy” 16 Notable Milestones in the Obama Administration’s Drug 17 War Policies Over the Past Year 17 » IBW Commends America’s Top Cop for his bold initiatives 17 » The Obama Administration’s New National Drug Control Strategy 19 » Obama commutes sentences for eight crack cocaine convictions 20 » Attorney General Eric Holder Announces Major Shift On U.S. Marijuana Policy 21 » Attorney General Holder Announces President Obama’s Budget Proposes $173 Million for Criminal Justice Reform 21 » New Clemency Initiative Details Broad New Criteria for Applicants 21 » Head Of DEA Refuses To Support Bill Modifying Minimum Sentences For Drugs 22 » DOJ Backs Proposal To Make Drug Sentences Shorter Retroactively 22 Big corporations are making a killing off the prison system 23 » The Power Structure Behind the Anti-Immigrant Movement 24 » The Stigma Lasts a Lifetime 25 The Mass Incarceration of Black Women Continues 27 » The U.S. Is Still The Only Country Where Youth Are Sentenced To Die In Prison 29 Widespread Prison Abuse Continues 31 The Real Reason Marijuana
    [Show full text]