A Comparison of Two Prosecution Policies in Cases of Intimate Partner Violence: Mandatory Case Filing Versus Following the Victim's Lead*

Abstract

Research SummaryThis study capitalized on differences in domestic violence prosecution policies between two boroughs of New York City. In Brooklyn, arrest cases generally are filed, but in the Bronx, cases typically are not filed when the victim does not want to proceed. We sampled 272 intimate partner cases declined by the Bronx prosecutor and 211 similar cases filed by the Brooklyn prosecutor. The Brooklyn policy is more costly, and most cases ultimately were dismissed. After 6 months, rearrest rates did not differ significantly between the two boroughs, although victims offered qualified support for the universal filing policy. 633 \\server05\productn\C\CPP\7-4\CPP410.txtunknown Seq: 2 30-DEC-08 12:03 634 DAVIS ET AL. Policy Implications Prosecutors face conflicting pressures when victims do not support prosecution. Victim empowerment and resource conservation favor declining such cases, but sending a message of zero tolerance favors filing. Our results support an intermediate policy of filing most cases but dropping them sooner to give victims a voice while avoiding heavy investments in cases headed for dismissal.

Examining the Effects of Community-Based Sanctions on Offender Recidivism

“…The findings from this study regarding community-based sanctions were inconsistent with those derived from the majority of studies of the effects of other types of legal sanctions (e.g., arrest) on recidivism (e.g., Berk et al, 1992;Davis et al, 1998Davis et al, , 2008Garner et al, 1995;Nagin, 1998;Nagin, Cullen, & Jonson, 2009;Pate & Hamilton, 1992;Sherman et al, 1992;Spohn & Holleran, 2002). Also in contrast to many of these studies, we observed that the effect of community-based sanctions on parole violators' odds and timing of recidivism was not conditional.…”

“…For example, researchers have examined the effect of arrest or prosecution on the likelihood of recidivism (e.g., Nagin, 1998;Sherman & Berk, 1984). Findings from related studies have been mixed (see, e.g., Berk et al, 1992;Brewer, Potterat, Muth, & Roberts, 2006;Davis, O'Sullivan, Farole, & Remple, 2008;Davis, Smith, & Nickles, 1998;Dixon, 2008;Garner, Fagan, & Maxwell, 1995;Nagin, 1998;Pate & Hamilton, 1992;Sherman & Berk, 1984;Sherman et al, 1992;Thistlethwaite et al, 1998;Wooldredge & Thistlethwaite, 2002). Researchers have also examined the effect of sentence severity on recidivism, and these studies have also revealed conflicting findings (see, e.g., Dejong, 1997;Spohn & Holleran, 2002;Tittle & Logan, 1973;Thistlethwaite et al, 1998;Wooldredge & Thistlethwaite, 2002;Yu, 1994).…”

Help-Seeking Patterns Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence: Do They Forgo the Criminal Justice System if Their Adjudication Wishes Are Not Met?

“…The ensuing mandatory or pro-arrest policies are often coupled with "no-drop policies" in which prosecutors wield discretion over whether a case will proceed with or without the victim's participation (Davis, O'Sullivan, Farole, & Rempel, 2008;Dobash, 2003;Hirschel & Hutchison, 2001;Rebovich, 1996). Similar to other crimes, in cases of assault by an intimate partner, the prosecutor may choose to withdraw the case, prosecute the case via trial by judge or jury, or divert the case out of the system through counseling or a batterer's intervention program.…”

Evidence‐Based and Victim‐Centered Prosecutorial Policies

“…Moreover, it was suggested that such policies further victimized women if enforcement of mandatory prosecution led to punitive actions against them (see Dempsey, ; Esptein, ; Waites, ), increased the risk of batterer retaliation, and perhaps most importantly, discouraged victims from calling the police if violence reoccurred (Bell, Goodman, and Dutton, ; Mills, ). Indeed, it was partly because of concerns about both the waste of resources and the potential harmful effects of coercing victims to move forward in cases that some jurisdictions adopted victim‐centered policies (Davis, O'Sullivan, Farole, and Rempel, ).…”

“…On three separate occasions over the previous 8 years, Criminology & Public Policy has published articles that examined the influence of adoption of mandatory prosecutorial policies in cases of domestic violence on several important outcomes, including extent and length of court oversight and convictions (Peterson and Dixon, ); pleas, sentences, and time to disposition (Davis, Smith, and Taylor, ); and recidivism, victim safety, victim satisfaction, and empowerment (Davis et al., ) in criminal courts in New York City and in Milwaukee, WI (Davis et al., ). Policy essays accompanying the articles consistently noted the importance of understanding how prosecutorial decisions that do not consider victim preferences affect victim empowerment and, ultimately, victim safety.…”