Showing papers in "Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology in 1992"

Institutional Perspective on Policing

Abstract: This article suggests that American municipal police departments are highly institutionalized organizations and should be studied in terms of how their formal structure and activities are shaped by powerful myths in their institutional environment. The incorporation of powerful myths into the structure and activities of police departments enables them to attain legitimacy; with legitimacy comes stability and protection from outside interference by powerful sovereign actors who are present in the enveloping institutional environment. However, legitimacy problems arising from conflicting institutional myths may precipitate full-blown organizational crises. Such police department crises are resolved ceremonially through a ritual that combines the public degradation of the department and the removal and replacement of the disgraced police chief by a new chief with a "legitimating" mandate.

The variable effects of arrest on criminal careers: The Milwaukee domestic violence experiment

Abstract: This research was supported by grant 86IJCXKO43 to the Crime Control Institute from the National Institute ofJustice. The points of view or opinions stated herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the U.S. Department of Justice or the Milwaukee Police Department. We are deeply indebted to former Milwaukee Police Chief Robert J. Ziarnik for his support of this research and to Chief Philip Arreola for continuing that support. We also thank Kathleen Stolpman and the staff of the Sojourner Truth House for their maintenance of hotline records of repeat violence. This article also reflects the work of many Crime Control Institute staff members and interviewers and the advice of Drs. Joel Garner, Albert J. Reiss, Jr., Robert Boruch, and Kinley Larntz, as well as Lucy Friedman and Allen Andrews. Most important were the officers who carried out the experiment, all of whom entered eligible cases into it: Joseph Vukovich, Zygmunt Lipski, Kenneth Jones, Michael Dubis, Lawrence Roberts, Thomas Skovera, Alan Singer, Frederick Birts, Thomas Bohl, Daniel Halbur, Peter Panasiuk, Scott Rinderle, Michael Braunreiter, Timothy Koceja, John Bogues, Edgar Bullock, Kim Stack, "Mick" Heinrich, Jerome Sims, John Wallace, Wayne Armon, Rosalie Gallegos, Edward Prah, Dean Schubert, Richard Thompson, Debra Glass, Cheryl Switzer, Robert Eckert, Daniel Kent, Tracy Becker, Steven Fyfe, Jeffery Watts, Gregory Blumenberg, Mark Hilt, and Kathleen Borkowski. * Lawrence W. Sherman is Professor of Criminology, University of Maryland and President, Crime Control Institute. Ph.D. Yale University, 1976. Janell D. Schmidt is Director, Milwaukee Office, Crime Control Institute. M.S., University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1985. Dennis P. Rogan is Vice President, Crime Control Institute. Ph.D., University of Maryland, 1988. Douglas A. Smith is Professor of Criminology, University of Maryland. Ph.D., Indiana University, 1982. Patrick R. Gartin is Associate in Criminology, University of Florida. Ph.D., University of Maryland, 1992. Ellen G. Cohn is Visiting Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, Indiana University at Indianapolis. Ph.D., Cambridge University, 1991. Dean J. Collins is Deputy Inspector, Milwaukee Police Department. M.S., University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1973. Anthony R. Bacich is Captain, Milwaukee Police Department. M.S., University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, 1986.

Gender Bias in Juvenile Justice Processing: Implications of the JJDP Act

Abstract: * Associate, Center for Studies in Criminology and Law, University of Florida; Ph.D., 1982, State University of New York at Albany; M.A., 1974, College of William and Mary; B.A., 1968, Wheaton College. ** Professor of Sociology, University of Florida; Ph.D., 1973, Southern Illinois University; M.A., 1967, Kent State University; B.A., 1966, Muskingum College. Acknowledgment: We would like to thank John C. Henretta for his helpful comments and for statistical advice; nevertheless, we alone are responsible for any errors that remain.

A Bayesian Analysis of the Colorado Springs Spouse Abuse Experiment

Abstract: This Article analyzes data from the Colorado Springs Spouse Abuse Experiment. In that experiment, suspects apprehended for misdemeanor spouse abuse were assigned at random to one of four treatments: (1) an emergency order of protection for the victim coupled with arrest of the suspect; (2) an emergency order of protection for the victim coupled with immediate crisis counseling for the suspect; (3) an emergency order of protection only; or (4) restoring order at the scene with no emergency order of protection. Outcome measures are taken from official police data and from follow-up interviews with victims. Using Bayesian procedures to take previous experiments into account, the balance of evidence supports a deterrent effect for arrest among 'good risk' offenders, who presumably have a lot to lose by being arrested. The balance of evidence is far more equivocal for a 'labeling effect' in which an arrest increases the likelihood of new violence.

A Comparative Study of the Preventive Effects of Mandatory Sentencing Laws for Gun Crimes

Abstract: No policy designed to prevent firearm violence is more popular than mandatory sentence enhancements for gun crimes By providing stiff and certain penalties when a gun is involved in an offense, sentence enhancement laws' promise to reduce the use of firearms by criminals Because the laws apply only when a crime is committed, they impose no direct costs on legitimate gun owners Opinion polls find that a large majority of the public favors mandatory sentence enhancements, and more than half the states have adopted them2 If these laws deliver their expected crime preventive effects, they are an especially attractive approach to regulating the use of firearms

Well Kept: Comparing Quality of Confinement in Private and Public Prisons

Abstract: Quality of confinement is compared among three women's prisons: private, state, and federal. Defined along eight dimensions, quality of confinement is measured using 333 indicators derived from institutional records and surveys of inmates and staff. A comparative Prison Quality Index summarizes the results for each prison on each dimension. While all three prisons are regarded as having been high in quality, the private prison outperformed its governmental counterparts on nearly every dimension.

The Arrest Experiments: A Feminist Critique

Abstract: Quantitative research has elicited a good deal of criticism from feminists. Quantitative methods are considered suspect because they place a greater value on "objective" and quantifiable informa­tion than on other sources of knowledge; because they assume a separation-indeed, a distance-between the researcher and the ob­ject of study; and because they isolate the factors under study from their socio-economic and historical context. In the domestic violence field, moreover, survey research is greeted with particular mistrust because of early studies which were perceived as both insensitive in their design and biased in their results.

The measurement of recidivism in cases of spouse assault

Abstract: Implicit in much of the research on spouse abuse' is the assumption that if a perpetrator of spouse assault is going to recidivate (i.e., abuse a victim again), he or she will do so within six months of the presenting offense. A six-month follow-up period has thus become the conventional time period used to assess recidivism in cases of spouse abuse. In 1984 Sherman and Berk conducted a field experiment to assess the effects of different police responses to individuals apprehended for spouse assault. They found, using a six-month outcome period, that arrest was the most effective of three standard methods used by the police (mediation, separation and arrest) to reduce domestic violence. The findings from their research (the Minneapolis Experiment) were so well received by law enforcement and those interested in the welfare of the victims of spouse abuse2 that the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded research in six additional communities (Dade County, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Charlotte, North Carolina; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Colorado Springs, Colorado; and Omaha, Nebraska) to replicate the Minneapolis Experiment. The primary purpose of these six replications was to assess

The Decontextualization of Domestic Violence

Abstract: In 1983, Lawrence Sherman and Richard Berk made headlines in the New York Times with their announcement that police arrests of woman abusers were more effective in deterring subsequent violence than more informal police actions.' They based this conclusion on their experiment in Minneapolis, which compared reincidence of violence after six months among 314 abusers who were either arrested, or temporarily separated from their victims by the police, or given some sort of police counseling.2 The study reported subsequent violence within six months by twenty-four percent of those sent away temporarily, nineteen percent of those counseled by the police, and only ten percent of those arrested. This suggested that the making of an arrest was an effective deterrent.3

Abolition and reinstatement of capital punishment during the progressive era and early 20th Century

Abstract: Ten American states abolished the death penalty between 1897 and 1917, but by the end of the 1930s, eight of these states had reinstated capital punishment. Not surprisingly, many of these abolitionist states were relatively homogeneous. Information ranging from individual motivations and tactics to the economic trends and the demographic characteristics of an area were drawn on to analyze developments in each state. Existing records indicate that most of the initial abolition laws had the support of the state's governors or a major local daily newspaper. While abolition was associated with economic boom, reinstatement occurred during economic recession and depression. Along with such issues of social context, reinstatement was triggered by the threat of lynchings and political radicals, since abolition gave those outside of government a monopoly on lethal violence.

Research that succeeds, policies that fail

Abstract: The battering of women in intimate relationships has existed for thousands of years. Until early in the twentieth century, women were considered "chattel," and it was legally and socially tolerated for husbands to use violence against their wives unless "some permanent injury be inflicted or there be an excess of violence."' Although there were various attempts through the years to challenge the legal and social support for this violence, not until the 1970s did the efforts of the feminist movement and battered women themselves result in significant change. These early calls for change were hardly shocking. Advocates for change asked only that battered women be treated with fairness and be provided an opportunity forjustice. 2 They questioned why a woman beaten in her own home by her husband was denied this justice, while someone assaulted in the street was recognized as a legitimate victim of a crime. 3 No one argued that our system ofjustice was perfect or that exercising legal authority over these offenders would magically solve a centuries-old problem. Advocates believed, however, that treating victims of domestic violence as seriously as other victims of violent crime would, if nothing else, communicate that the behavior was no longer socially or legally

Specifying the Relationship betweem Arrestee Drug Test Results and Recidivism

Abstract: Over the last fifteen years, research has confirmed what many criminal justice practitioners have long suspected: among criminal populations, drug use is a predictor of future criminal activity. Improved drug testing technology has significantly enhanced the ability to obtain information about an arrestee's recent drug use. However, the use of this information is a source of considerable debate. Some propose evidence of an arrestee's recent drug use should play a part in decisions about pretrial detention, including what requirements should be imposed as a condition of release. Opponents contend the results "predict" future criminality, but only because the drug test information duplicates other risk factors, such as the accused's prior criminal history. The opponents argue that widespread drug testing of arrestees is unnecessary because information on these other risk factors is readily available, cheaper and less intrusive. In this paper, we examine two empirical issues in this debate. First, are the results of drug tests at the time of arrest related to recidivism after the effects of other risk factors have been taken into account? Second, does the ability of drug test results to predict recidivism vary depending on an individual's other risk factors?

Contemporary Police Practices in Domestic Violence Cases: Arresting the Abuser: Is it Enough

Abstract: Domestic violence unquestionably looms as one of the more serious and complex problems facing the law enforcement community today. Domestic-related violence has long been the leading cause of homicide for most communities.1 As a core social phenomena, it challenges the scope, the breadth and the role of modern law enforcement policy and practice. The police have not always responded to this challenge in the most appropriate fashion. Historically, domestic violence has been viewed as an essentially private, family matter not suitable for aggressive governmental intervention. In fact, American law once recognized husbands as titular heads of their households with a right to dispense corporal punishment to disobedient wives.2 Although most laws of that sort disappeared during the early nineteenth century,3 their residual effects continued to manifest themselves in the social norms and assumptions of modern society. Those assumptions are increasingly under attack. Society has expanded the role of government as a protector not only outside the home, but within it as well. Institutional transitions to new policies and procedures frequently lag behind changes in social attitude, however, and this has traditionally been true of police departments where domestic violence is concerned. Moreover, not every officer has personally accepted this change, and insensitivity to the victims of domestic violence has sometimes been the result.

Suppressing Domestic Violence with Law Reforms

Abstract: The timely message of these papers is that specific deterrence is not so simple an idea as it seems. One of the purposes of criminal punishment is to change the behavior of the offender by associating negative reinforcements, such as fines and detention, with misbehavior. Arrest also counts as a negative reinforcement. For any criminal contemplating a crime, prison time is the most disagreeable but also least probable foreseeable consequence of his anticipated transgression. Fear of arrest, less obnoxious but far more probable than serving time, may actually loom larger in the criminal's calculations than fear of what may happen if the criminal process plays through to its classical conclusion. The idea of specific deterrence is the most instinctive of penal policies. One need not be a rat psychologist to appreciate that associating a negative reinforcement with a given behavior makes that behavior less likely to recur; even small children have this intuition. So if it is obvious that getting oneself arrested is tallied as a "negative" experience, it follows that arresting someone for a given offense will make that individual less likely to commit that offense in the future. The process is just the same as that in the psychology laboratory, where white rats are taught to avoid a certain behavior by repeated electric shocks. Would that life were so simple. It is useful, every so often, for those who have wandered far into the wilderness of theory to take a breather with empirical materials, if only as a reminder of how untidy the real world is compared with the laboratory. The traditional law of most jurisdictions allowed police officers to arrest persons suspected of committing misdemeanors (such as unarmed assault) only where a warrant had been issued or where the misdemeanor was committed in the of-