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