The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Factors Related to Domestic Violence Court Dispositions in a Large Urban Area: The Role of Victim/Witness Reluctance and Other Variables, Final Report Author(s): Joanne Belknap Ph.D. ; Dee L. R. Graham Ph.D. Document No.: 184232 Date Received: August 30, 2000 Award Number: 96-WT-NX-0004 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. FACTORS RELATED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COURT DISPOSITIONS IN A LARGE URBAN AREA: THE ROLE OF VICTIM/WITNESS RELUCTANCE AND OTHER VARIABLES FINAL REPORT Principal Investigators: Joanne Belknap, Ph.D. Departments of Sociology and Women's Studies University of Colorado Dee L. R. Graham, Ph.D. Department of Psychology University of Cincinnati Research Associates: Jennifer Hartman, Ph.D. Northeastern University P. Gail Allen, J.D., Ph.D. Private Practice Louisville, KY University of Cincinnati Research Assistants: Victoria Lippen Jennifer Sutherland Anthony Flores Colleen Kadleck Dawn Wilson June 2000 Prepared under Grant No. 96-WT-NX-0004, Research and Evaluation on Violence Against Women from the National Institute of Justice. Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice. :?p,OFZqTY OF 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. ABSTRACT Most of the extant research on domestic violence and the criminal processing system focuses on the police response to the victims and batterers. Relatively little scholarly work attempts to understand how the courts operate in responding to battered women and their batterers. However, just as the police historically have failed to arrest batterers, many prosecutors have failed to prosecute arrested batterers, and judges frequently have failed to convict them. The study reported in this document helps fill the knowledge gap about what happens with domestic violence cases where the alleged batterers were arrested, once they leave law enforcement agencies. Specifically, the goal was to identify factors which influence whether city misdemeanor domestic violence cases where batterers were arrested by the police, result in dismissals, acquittals, or convictions in the courts, and how these cases are processed. Key to this understanding is awareness of victidwitness reluctance, as domestic violence cases are widely known to have large numbers of victims who do not testify against their batterers, or who may actively try to get the charges dropped, possibly to the extent of testifying to support their batterers' "innocence." The specific objectives of this study were to determine factors that influence court officials' (judges', prosecutors', and defense attorneys') decision-making in domestic violence cases, and factors that influence victidwitness reluctance in bringing batterers to successful adjudication (convictions). To reach these objectives, data for the study were collected from a variety of the key actors and sources: Pre- Trial Services Files and data; (2) detailed interviews and surveys of prosecutors, judges, and public defenders interviews; (3) intensive content analysis of court transcripts; and (4) detailed interviews and surveys of domestic violence victims. The research design is a result of collaboration. The research-community partnership was between researchers at the University of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati Domestic Violence Coordinating Committee (DVCC), a community organization composed of judges, prosecutors, police officers and administrators, victim advocates, mental health and social workers, and others. 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. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors of this Final Report are deeply indebted to the survivors, judges, prosecutors, and public defenders who took the time to participate in our study. For obvious reasons, this study would have been impossible without their cooperation and commitment. We are also very grateful to the Cincinnati Domestic Violence Coordinating Committee, who worked with us to write the grant. In particular we would like to thank Judge Timothy Black and Prosecutor Terry Cosgrove. We are also indebted to Mr. Dave Gibbs in Pretrial Services. He gave us invaluable time, skill, and humor. Finally, we would like to thank students who contributed to the research project, whose names are not listed as research assistants. Specifically, we thank Melissa Briggs, Kim Britton, Dee Dozier, Emily Gaarder, Robin Graft, Elaine Gunnison, Beth Mainwaring, Charlene Taylor, and Sue Tekulve, all of the University of Cincinnati. 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. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page No. Chapter One: Introduction: Statement of the Problem and Review of the Literature ................................. 1 Research Questions ....................................................................................................................... 3 A Brief History of Woman Battering .......................................................... ........................ 3 Court Responses to Domestic Violence ................................................................. .....4 VictirdWitness Reluctance ........... ............................................................... 8 The Context of the Study Site................................................................................. 11 ............................................................. 13 Chapter Two: The Results of the Pretrial Data ......................................................................................... 14 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... Data Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 15 Findings ........................................................................ ..................... 17 Sumniary .................................................................................................................................... 24 Chapter Three: Court Professionals' Self-Reported Responses to and Attitudes About .. Domestic Violence .................................................................................................................................... 27 Introduction ................ ......................................................................................................... ..27 Method ....................... ........................................................................................................... 28 Fiiidings ..................................................... ......... ................................ 33 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 75 Chapter Four: Content Analysis of Court Transcripts .............................................................................. 80 introduction ................................................................................... Method .......................................................................................... ............................. 84 Findings ....................... ............................................. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 1 13 Chapter Five: Victim Interviews and Surveys ............................................................ Introduction .............................................................................. ............................................................... ResultsiDiscussion ..................................................................................................................... 13 1 Chapter Six: Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................... 166 .. Future Research Implications ..................................................................................................... 166 Policy Implications ...... .................................. ............... ... 167 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................................