DOCSLIB.ORG

Murder in Families

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Murder in Families U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report Murder in Families By John M. Dawson • When a son killed a parent, his victim and Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D. July 1994 was about as likely to be the mother as the BJS Statisticians father: 47% mothers versus 53% fathers. The United States has over 3,000 But when a daughter killed a parent, her A survey of murder cases disposed counties, but more than half of all victim was more likely to be the father than in 1988 in the courts of large urban murders occur in just 75 of them, the the mother: 81% fathers versus 19% counties indicated that 16% of murder Nation’s mort populous jurisdictions. mothers. victims were members of the defendant's This report taps a rich source of murder family. The remainder were murdered by data — prosecutors’ files in a sample of • In murders of persons under age 12, the friends or acquaintances (64%) or by these large urban places — for detailed victims' parents accounted for 57% of the strangers (20%). These findings are drawn information on the nature and extent of murderers. from a representative sample survey of a particular type of murder: those that State and county prosecutors' records. occur within families. In addition, the • Eleven percent of all victims age The survey covered disposed charges report uses these files justice systems 60 or older were killed by a son or against nearly 10,000 murder defendants, respond to family murder. daughter. whose murder cases accounted for over 8,000 victims. This study was possible as a result of • No significant difference in the conviction the generous cooperation of urban rate separated family murder defendants Other findings include the following: prosecutors and their staffs in jurisdic- (76%) from nonfamily murder defendants tions throughout the Nation. On behalf (72%). w Among murder victims 6.5% were killed of BJS, I want to express my sincere by their spouses, 3.5% by their parents, appreciation. • Convicted family murder defendants 1.9% by their own children, 1.5% by their (88%) were as likely to receive a prison siblings, and 2.6% by some other family Lawrence A. Greenfeld sentence as convicted nonfamily murder member. Acting Director defendants (91%). • A third of family murders involved a female as the killer. In sibling murders, victims were husbands and 62% were • Firearms were used in the killing females were 15% of killers, and in wives. of 42% of all family murder victims, murders of parents, 18%. But in spouse compared to 63% of all nonfamily murder murders, women represented 41% of • Forty-five percent of family murder victims. killers. In murders of their offspring, victims were female, compared to women predominated, accounting for 55% 18% of nonfamily murder victims. • Seventy-four percent of murder defen- of killers. dants had a prior criminal record of arrest When a mother killed her own child, the or conviction for a crime. A substantial • Among black marital partners, wives offspring she killed was more likely to be a percentage of murder victims, 44%, also were just about as likely to kill their son than a daughter: 64% sons versus had a prior criminal record. However, 19% husbands as husbands were to kill their 36% daughters. But when a father killed of family murder victims had a prior record, wives: 47% of the victims of a spouse his own child, the offspring he killed was compared to 51% of nonfamily murder were husbands and 53% were wives. about as likely to be a daughter as a son: victims. Also, 56% of family murder defen- Among white victims murdered by their 52% daughters versus 48% sons. dants, compared to 77% of other murder spouse, wives were much less likely to be defendants, had a prior record. the killers: 38% of the The survey Compared to other murder victims, Compared to other murder defend- family murder victims were — ants, defendants in family murders— Survey data were compiled from State prosecutors' files and were based on a More often More often representative sample of all murder cases disposed in large urban counties in 1988. $ female than male: $ were age 30 or older: The murders were committed in 1988 or 45% versus 18% (table 2) 57% versus 32% (table 2) earlier. The Nation's 75 largest counties under age 12: $ $ had a history of mental illness: (as defined by the number of arrests and 19% versus 2% (table 2) 14% versus 3% (table 3) population size) formed the population $ age 60 or older: $ committed a daytime murder: from which 33 counties were systematically 12% versus 6% (table 2) 38% versus 24% (table 5) sampled for the survey. $ killed during the daytime: $ committed the murder in the 39% versus 25% (table 5) defendant’s own home: Within each of the 33 sampled counties, a killed in the victim’s own home: $ 64% versus 10% (table 5). criminal case was eligible for sampling if 82% versus 22% (table 5) (a) 1 or more defendants in the case were Less often charged with murder, and (b) at least 1 Less often murder defendant in the case was $ were under age 30: disposed by a court in 1988. The sample $ identified as alcohol users: 43% versus 68% (table 2) consisted of 2,539 murder cases against 33% versus 51% (table 3) $ were identified as alcohol users: 3,119 defendants and involving 2,655 $ unemployed: 48% versus 68% (table 3) victims. When statistically weighted, the 7% versus 16% (table 3) $ were unemployed: 3,119 defendants in the sampled cases killed by a firearm: $ 29% versus 37% (table 3) represented 9,576 murder defendants in 42% versus 63% (table 5) $ had a victim of the same sex: the Nation's 75 largest counties, and the $ armed: 15% versus 20% (page 4) 34% versus 80% (table 4) 2,655 victims represented 8,063 victims in killed by multiple assailants: $ $ used a firearm: the 75 largest counties. The weighted 9% versus 19% (table 6) 43% versus 64% (table 5) estimate of 8,063 victims accounted for $ identified as having a past record $ had a record of arrest or conviction: 39% of the nationwide total of 20,860 or arrest or conviction: 56% versus 77% (table 7) murder victims in 1988. $ involved in murders in which both $ were involved in murders in which the defendant and the victim had a both the defendant and the victim had Murder includes (1) intentionally causing prior criminal record: a prior criminal record: the death of another person without 14% versus 43% (table 8). 15% versus 44% (table 8). extreme provocation or legal justification, (2) causing the death of another while committing or attempting to commit another crime, and (3) nonnegligent or Table 1. Murder victims and defendants in the 75 largest urban counties, voluntary manslaughter. Murder excludes by victim-assailant family relationship, 1988 negligent or involuntary manslaughter as well as attempted murder, which is classi- Relationship of Murder victims Murder defendants victim to assailant Number Percent Number Percent fied as aggravated assault. Murder also All 8,063 100.0% 9,576 100.0% includes accessory to murder, aiding and Nonfamily 6,755 83.8 8,292 86.8 abetting a murder, and facilitating a Family 1,308 16.2 1,284 13.4 murder. When the term murder is used in Spouse 528 6.5 531 5.5 this report with-out qualification, it includes Offspring 285 3.5 258 2.7 nonnegligent manslaughter. Defendant in Parent 154 1.9 150 1.6 this report refers to a person arrested for Sibling 123 1.5 121 1.3 Other 218 2.6 224 2.3 murder and presented by the police for Note: Spouse includes common-law spouse. cousin, in-law, extended family members, and other family prosecution. Offspring includes grandchild and step-child. members. Parent includes grandparent and step-parent. Detail percentages may not add to total because of Victims Sibling includes step-sibling. Other includes rounding. Murder cases disposed in the 75 largest counties in 1988 involved an estimated 8,063 victims (table 1). Sixteen percent of victims had a family relationship to at least one defendant in the case. The most frequent specific relationship was that of spouse; the least frequent, sibling. Nonfamily victim-offender relationships 2 Murder in Families Table 2. Sex, race, and age, by the family relationship of murder victims and defendants, 1988 Relationship of Sex Race Age victim to assailant All Male Female White Black Other Under 12 12-19 20-29 30-59 60 or older Victims All 100% 77.8% 22.2% 43.5% 54.2% 2.3% 4.8% 10.9% 35.6 % 41.8 % 7.0 % Nonfamily 100 82.2 17.8 44.4 53.3 2.3 2.1 12.2 38.5 41.1 6.1 Family 100 55.5 44.5 39.0 58.6 2.4 18.8 3.9 20.3 45.3 11.6 Spouse 100 40.2 59.8 41.2 56.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 27.9 65.0 7.1 Offspring 100 55.8 44.2 32.6 65.6 1.8 78.5 10.9 7.7 3.0 0.0 Parent 100 57.2 42.8 54.8 45.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 56.7 42.4 Sibling 100 73.0 27.0 33.5 64.5 2.0 8.7 2.0 43.3 42.6 3.3 Other 100 74.9 25.1 34.1 61.0 4.9 4.6 8.2 19.1 47.5 20.6 Defendants All 100% 89.5% 10.5 % 36.2% 61.9% 1.8% 0.1% 21.8% 42.5 % 31.4 % 4.2 % Nonfamily 100 93.2 6.8 35.7 62.6 1.8 0.1 23.1 44.5 28.4 3.8 Family 100 65.5 34.5 39.7 58.0 2.3 0.0 13.0 29.7 50.5 6.8 Spouse 100 59.3 40.7 41.8 56.1 2.2 0.0 0.9 21.9 66.1 11.1 Offspring 100 45.4 54.6 34.5 64.5 1.0 0.0 17.2 36.4 40.3 6.0 Parent 100 81.6 18.4 49.8 50.2 0.0 0.0 38.2 30.7 29.4 1.7 Sibling 100 84.9 15.1 32.2 65.8 2.0 0.0 16.9 36.7 46.4 0.0 Other 100 83.5 16.5 38.1 56.1 5.9 0.0 18.0 35.9 41.3 4.9 Note: See table 1 notes for definitions of the family relationships.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identity Theft Literature Review
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Identity Theft Literature Review Author(s): Graeme R. Newman, Megan M. McNally Document No.: 210459 Date Received: July 2005 Award Number: 2005-TO-008 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. IDENTITY THEFT LITERATURE REVIEW Prepared for presentation and discussion at the National Institute of Justice Focus Group Meeting to develop a research agenda to identify the most effective avenues of research that will impact on prevention, harm reduction and enforcement January 27-28, 2005 Graeme R. Newman School of Criminal Justice, University at Albany Megan M. McNally School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University, Newark This project was supported by Contract #2005-TO-008 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Casenotes: Criminal Law—Homicide—Felony-Murder—Felon Is
    University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 9 Article 9 Issue 3 Spring 1980 1980 Casenotes: Criminal Law — Homicide — Felony- Murder — Felon Is Culpable for Murder in the First Degree under Maryland's Felony-Murder Statute When Police Officer Kills Kidnapped Hostage Used by Felon as Human Shield. Jackson v. State, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979) John A. Roberts University of Baltimore School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Roberts, John A. (1980) "Casenotes: Criminal Law — Homicide — Felony-Murder — Felon Is Culpable for Murder in the First Degree under Maryland's Felony-Murder Statute When Police Officer Kills Kidnapped Hostage Used by Felon as Human Shield. Jackson v. State, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979)," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 9: Iss. 3, Article 9. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol9/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CRIMINAL LAW - HOMICIDE - FELONY-MURDER - FELON IS CULPABLE FOR MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE UNDER MARYLAND'S FELONY-MURDER STATUTE WHEN POLICE OFFICER KILLS KIDNAPPED HOSTAGE USED BY FELON AS HUMAN SHIELD. JACKSON v. STATE, 286 Md. 430, 408 A.2d 711 (1979). At common law, when one commits homicide while perpetrating a felony, the felony-murder rule raises that homicide to murder.' In Maryland, when a person commits murder in the perpetration of one or more statutorily-enumerated felonies, that murder is in the first degree under the state's felony-murder statute.2 Maryland courts have readily applied this statute when the felon has struck the fatal blow.' Recently, in Jackson v.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unnecessary Crime of Conspiracy
    California Law Review VOL. 61 SEPTEMBER 1973 No. 5 The Unnecessary Crime of Conspiracy Phillip E. Johnson* The literature on the subject of criminal conspiracy reflects a sort of rough consensus. Conspiracy, it is generally said, is a necessary doctrine in some respects, but also one that is overbroad and invites abuse. Conspiracy has been thought to be necessary for one or both of two reasons. First, it is said that a separate offense of conspiracy is useful to supplement the generally restrictive law of attempts. Plot- ters who are arrested before they can carry out their dangerous schemes may be convicted of conspiracy even though they did not go far enough towards completion of their criminal plan to be guilty of attempt.' Second, conspiracy is said to be a vital legal weapon in the prosecu- tion of "organized crime," however defined.' As Mr. Justice Jackson put it, "the basic conspiracy principle has some place in modem crimi- nal law, because to unite, back of a criniinal purpose, the strength, op- Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley. A.B., Harvard Uni- versity, 1961; J.D., University of Chicago, 1965. 1. The most cogent statement of this point is in Note, 14 U. OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW REv. 56, 61-62 (1956): "Since we are fettered by an unrealistic law of criminal attempts, overbalanced in favour of external acts, awaiting the lit match or the cocked and aimed pistol, the law of criminal conspiracy has been em- ployed to fill the gap." See also MODEL PENAL CODE § 5.03, Comment at 96-97 (Tent.
    [Show full text]
  • Piteous Massacre’: Violence, Language, and the Off-Stage in Richard III
    Journal of the British Academy, 8(s3), 91–109 DOI https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/008s3.091 Posted 15 June 2020 ‘Piteous massacre’: violence, language, and the off-stage in Richard III Georgina Lucas Abstract: Shakespeare regularly stages extreme violence. In Titus Andronicus, Chiron and Demetrius are baked in a pie and eaten by their mother. Gloucester’s eyes are plucked out in King Lear. In contradistinction to this graphic excess are moments when violence is relegated off-stage: Macbeth kills King Duncan in private; when Richard III suborns the assassination of his nephews—the notorious ‘Princes in the Tower’—the boys are killed away from the audience. In such instances, the spectator must imagine the scope and formation of the violence described. Focussing on Richard III, this article asks why Shakespeare uses the word ‘massacre’ to express the murder of the two princes. Determining the varied, and competing, meanings of the term in the 16th and 17th centuries, the article uncovers a range of ways an early audience might have interpreted the killings—as mass murder, assassination, and butchery—and demonstrates their thematic connections to child-killing across the cycle of plays that Richard III concludes. Keywords: Shakespeare, massacre, Richard III, off-stage violence, child-killing. Notes on the author: Georgina Lucas is Lecturer in Shakespeare and Renaissance Literature in the School of Arts, English and Languages at Queen’s University, Belfast. Her research focusses upon the representation of mass and sexual violence on the early modern stage, and the performance and reception of Shakespeare during and after acts of atrocity.
    [Show full text]
  • Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties
    U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Executive Summary September 1995, NCJ-156831 Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties By Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D. 87. The average age was 39. The average age of hus- BJS Statistician band defendants was 41; of wife defendants, 37 years. and John M. Dawson former BJS Statistician Arrest charge Following are highlights from Spouse Murder Defendants First-degree murder was the most frequent charge at in Large Urban Counties. The full report may be ordered arrest, accounting for 70% of defendants. In descending using the form on page 4. order of seriousness, charges were distributed this way across the 540 spouse murder defendants: Number of spouse murder defendants and their 70% first-degree murder demographic characteristics 24% second-degree murder 6% nonnegligent manslaughter In 1988 the justice system in the Nation's 75 largest coun- ties disposed of an estimated 540 spouse murder cases. How the justice system disposed of spouse murder Husbands charged with killing their wife outnumbered cases wives charged with killing their husband. Of the 540, 318 or 59% were husband defendants and 222 or Cases were disposed of in one of three ways: 41% were wife defendants. (1) the prosecutor declined to prosecute; or Blacks comprised 55% of the 540 In spouse murder cases, wife defendants were less likely to be convicted defendants, and and to receive severe sentences than husband defendants whites comprised 43%. Among hus- 11 % Not prosecuted Probation 5 % band defendants 46 % Pleaded guilty 51% were black and 318 husbands Sentenced to Jail 1 % 41 % Convicted at trial 45% were white.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Law--Conspiracy and the Felony Murder Doctrine in Kentucky J
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 29 | Issue 1 Article 14 1940 Criminal Law--Conspiracy and the Felony Murder Doctrine in Kentucky J. Wirt Turner Jr. University of Kentucky Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Turner, J. Wirt Jr. (1940) "Criminal Law--Conspiracy and the Felony Murder Doctrine in Kentucky," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 29 : Iss. 1 , Article 14. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol29/iss1/14 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KENTUCKY LAw JOURNAL In conclusion, it is submitted that the felony murder doctrine in Kentucky is based on the same principles as the negligent murder doctrine, since to convict a defendant of murder for a death occuring during the commission of a felony there must first be a felony dangerous to life and, secondly, the death of the victim must be the necessary or natural consequence of the felony. J. GRiANVILLE CLARK CRIMINAL LAW-CONSPIRACY AND THE FELONY MURDER DOCTRINE IN KENTUCKY* Defendant was indicted jointly with two others for the crime of wilful murder by setting fire to a house and burning a child to death. The evidence showed that defendant was not near enough to aid and abet in the crime.
    [Show full text]
  • Still Life: America's Increasing Use of Life and Long-Term Sentences
    STILL LIFE America’s Increasing Use of Life and Long-Term Sentences For more information, contact: This report was written by Ashley Nellis, Ph.D., Senior Research Analyst at The Sentencing Project. Morgan McLeod, Communications Manager, The Sentencing Project designed the publication layout and Casey Anderson, Program 1705 DeSales Street NW Associate, assisted with graphic design. 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 The Sentencing Project is a national non-profit organization engaged in research and advocacy on criminal justice issues. Our work is (202) 628-0871 supported by many individual donors and contributions from the following: sentencingproject.org twitter.com/sentencingproj Atlantic Philanthropies facebook.com/thesentencingproject Morton K. and Jane Blaustein Foundation craigslist Charitable Fund Ford Foundation Bernard F. and Alva B. Gimbel Foundation Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund General Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church JK Irwin Foundation Open Society Foundations Overbrook Foundation Public Welfare Foundation David Rockefeller Fund Elizabeth B. and Arthur E. Roswell Foundation Tikva Grassroots Empowerment Fund of Tides Foundation Wallace Global Fund Copyright © 2017 by The Sentencing Project. Reproduction of this document in full or in part, and in print or electronic format, only by permission of The Sentencing Project. 2 The Sentencing Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 5 I. Overview 6 II. Life by the Numbers 7 III. Crime of Conviction 12 IV. Gender 14 V. Race and Ethnicity 14 VI. Juvenile Status 16 VII. Discussion 18 A. Divergent Trends in Life Sentences 18 B. Drivers of Life Sentences 20 C. The Death Penalty as a Reference Point for “Less Punitive” Sentences 22 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Misprision of a Felony Is Not a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
    DePaul Law Review Volume 69 Issue 1 Fall 2019 Article 5 Misapprising Misprision: Why Misprision Of A Felony Is Not A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude Alexandra Carl Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Alexandra Carl, Misapprising Misprision: Why Misprision Of A Felony Is Not A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude, 69 DePaul L. Rev. 143 (2020) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol69/iss1/5 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\D\DPL\69-1\DPL105.txt unknown Seq: 1 5-FEB-20 12:14 MISAPPRISING MISPRISION: WHY MISPRISION OF A FELONY IS NOT A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE INTRODUCTION Immigration is an area of American law in which archaic terminol- ogy and hyper-technical statutory interpretation collide with human lives. The results can be arbitrary, absurd, or tragic. Noncitizens’ be- havior is scrutinized, categorized, and judged according to different standards than those that citizens must meet or even consider, and the consequences can be disproportionately devastating. One illustrative example is the immigration law term “crime involving moral turpi- tude” (CIMT). This antiquated term is not officially defined, nor does any list of crimes definitively involving moral turpitude exist. There are no “crimes involving moral turpitude” outside of immigration law, so citizens never need to evaluate whether their behavior may or may not be legally turpitudinous.
    [Show full text]
  • Obstruction of Justice: Unwarranted Expansion of 18 U.S.C
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 102 | Issue 1 Article 2 Winter 2012 Obstruction of Justice: Unwarranted Expansion of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1) Sarah O'Rourke Schrup Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Sarah O'Rourke Schrup, Obstruction of Justice: Unwarranted Expansion of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1), 102 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 25 (2013). https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol102/iss1/2 This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/12/10201-0025 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 102, No. 1 Copyright © 2012 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: UNWARRANTED EXPANSION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1512(C)(1) SARAH O’ROURKE SCHRUP* This Article suggests that prosecutors are misusing and courts are misinterpreting the Sarbanes–Oxley obstruction of justice statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1). As a result, the statute is being applied far beyond the corporate fraud or even general fraud context to conduct that Congress never intended to punish with this statute. Such an expansive interpretation lays bare the ambiguity inherent in the statutory language. A proper statutory construction that explores the statute itself, related provisions, canons of construction, the legislative history, and the investigatory process at the Securities and Exchange Commission shows that Congress could not have intended the limitless sweep of the statute that some courts and prosecutors have fashioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Drug-Related Crime
    NT OF ME J T US U.S. Department of Justice R T A I P C E E D B O J C S Office of Justice Programs F A V M F O I N A C IJ S R E BJ G O OJJDP O F PR Bureau of Justice Statistics JUSTICE Drugs & Crime Data September 1994, NCJ–149286 Fact Sheet: Drug-Related Crime Drugs are related to crime in multiple ways. Most This fact sheet will focus on the second and third catego- directly, it is a crime to use, possess, manufacture, or ries. Drug-related offenses and a drug-using lifestyle are distribute drugs classified as having a potential for abuse. major contributors to the U.S. crime problem. Cocaine, heroin, marijuana, and amphetamines are examples of drugs classified to have abuse potential. Drug users in the general population are more Drugs are also related to crime through the effects they likely than nonusers to commit crimes have on the user’s behavior and by generating violence and other illegal activity in connection with drug traffick- The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ing. The following scheme summarizes the various ways (HHS) National Household Survey on Drug Abuse asks that drugs and crime are related. individuals living in households about their drug and alcohol use and their involvement in acts that could get Summary of drugs/crime relationship them in trouble with the police. Provisional data for 1991 show that among adult respondents (ages 18–49), those Drugs and crime who use cannabis (marijuana) or cocaine were much more relationship Definition Examples likely to commit crimes of all types than those who did Drug-defined Violations of laws Drug possession or offenses prohibiting or reg- use.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Felony Murder Rule: Purpose and Effect
    The American Felony Murder Rule: Purpose and Effect Daniel Ganz 21090905 UC Berkeley, Spring 2012 Legal Studies Honors Thesis Supervised by Professor Richard Perry Ganz 1 I. Abstract Most US states have a felony murder rule, which allows prosecutors to charge felons with murder for any death that occurs during and because of the commission of the felony. This allows the felon to be convicted with murder without requiring the prosecution to prove the mens rea that would otherwise be necessary for a murder conviction. Much of the legal scholarship indicates that the purpose of the felony murder rule is to deter felonies and to make felons limit their use of violence while they're committing the felony by making the felon internalize more fully the negative consequences of their actions. It's unclear whether legislatures that adopt felony murder rules are more concerned with deterring criminal behavior or making criminals less violent when committing felonies. We analyze judicial decisions to infer what judges believed were the intentions of the legislatures that adopted felony murder statutes. We also use regression analysis to determine whether felony murder statutes are correlated with lower crime rates or lower rates of the average number of deaths that occur during felonies. We do this both by modeling felony rates and rates of felony- related deaths as a function of whether a state has a felony murder rule, and by determining how felony rates and rates of felony-related deaths change when a state adopts or abolishes a felony murder rule. Our results indicate that the felony murder rule does not have a significant effect on crime rates or crime-related death rates.
    [Show full text]
  • From Overdose to Crime Scene: the Incompatibility of Drug-Induced Homicide Statutes with Due Process
    PHILLIPS IN PRINTER FINAL 11/16/2020 7:39 PM FROM OVERDOSE TO CRIME SCENE: THE INCOMPATIBILITY OF DRUG-INDUCED HOMICIDE STATUTES WITH DUE PROCESS KAITLIN S. PHILLIPS† ABSTRACT As the opioid epidemic ravages the United States, federal and state legislators continue to seek various ways to mitigate the crisis. Though public health advocates have successfully pushed for harm-reduction initiatives, a contrasting punitive response has emerged. Across the country, prosecutors and legislators are turning to drug-induced homicide (“DIH”) statutes as a law-and-order response to the crisis. DIH statutes, which can carry sentences as severe as life in prison, impose criminal liability on anyone who provided drugs that led to a fatal overdose. Though DIH laws are often justified as tools to target large-scale drug distributors, in reality, they more often target friends or family of the deceased. Troublingly, despite the foundational criminal law principle that intent is required to impose culpability, DIH laws are strict liability offenses, requiring no intent toward the resulting death. Examining the development of strict liability offenses in the American legal system, this Note asserts that criminal intent—mens rea—is an indispensable due process protection in homicide law. It argues that DIH laws, though not facially unconstitutional, are functionally anti-constitutional—inconsistent with the spirit, if not the letter, of due process. This Note is the first to reconcile DIH statutes with the broader context of strict liability criminal jurisprudence, contending that these laws impose punishment far in excess of the culpability they require. Accordingly, it calls upon state legislatures to repeal or amend these laws, offering various frameworks to better align DIH statutes with the protections required for criminal defendants.
    [Show full text]