Contextual Influences on the Sentencing of Individuals Convicted of Sexual Crimes

Abstract

This study examines effects of court and community contextual factors on sentencing outcomes for individuals convicted of sexual crimes using indicators from two perspectives—focal concerns and populist punitiveness. Sourced from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing, the sample includes 9,431 persons convicted of sexual crimes and a precision-matched sample of persons convicted of non-sexual violent crimes for comparison. Based on multilevel hurdle regression models for both incarceration and sentence length decisions, results indicate that individuals convicted of sexual crimes face enhanced sentence severity in judicial districts with smaller courts, increased jail capacity, stronger political competition, and higher religious homogeneity. The results also suggest statistically significant differences between effects for persons convicted of sexual crimes and a matched sample of persons convicted of violent crimes. Overall, results suggest that specific contextual factors have a distinguishable impact on sentencing of individuals convicted of sexual crimes.

Going Off the Grid: Assessing Sentencing Departures for Individuals Convicted of Sexual Offenses

“…Further, judges in large jurisdictions are likely exposed to sex offense cases on a routine basis, leading to higher tolerance and less punitiveness (Eisenstein et al, 1988;Kramer & Ulmer, 2009). This has been documented by Thompson et al (2019), who found individuals convicted of sex offenses were 58% less likely to be sentenced to incarceration when they were adjudicated in large courts compared to medium courts. Studies also indicate that local resources, such as available jail space and county caseload, serve as practical constraints on departure decisions (Johnson, 2005).…”

“…To the extent judges view individuals convicted of sex crimes as a special population in need of harsher punishment, such constraints may be less pertinent. As individuals convicted of sexual offenses receive significantly less benefit from greater caseloads compared to violent offenders (Thompson et al, 2019), organizational constraints may be less influential in the decision to depart from sentencing guidelines as has been previously seen in the literature with general offender populations.…”

“…Recent scholarship has considered the extent to which individuals convicted of sex offenses may represent a special population in sentencing (Rydberg et al, 2018;Thompson et al, 2019). This research has highlighted that the public holds particularly punitive orientations toward this group (Pickett et al, 2013;Socia & Harris, 2016), in part because of pervasive stereotypes homogenizing such individuals into a high-risk class of predators (Sample & Bray, 2003).…”

“…Scholars also contend that assessments of the focal concerns vary across court communities (Kramer & Ulmer, 2009;Ulmer & Johnson, 2004). Thompson et al (2019) posited that judges may reevaluate the salience of traditional focal concerns correlates when sentencing individuals convicted of sex offenses, as judges utilize their position to protect the community in response to varying degrees of pressure and demands for public safety (Bumby & Maddox, 1999). Thus, differences in court structure, resources, and community social characteristics are likely to influence departure decisions (Johnson, 2005).…”

The Integration of People Convicted of a Sexual Offence Into the Community and Their (Risk) Management

“…This is problematic as it can result in the perception that the criminal justice response to sexual offending is inconsistent and not fit for purpose [49][50][51][52][53]. Unfortunately, this works to erode trust in the criminal justice system by victim/survivors [49,[54][55][56][57], which has resulted in an increase in the under-reporting of sexual offences [54]. Determining the true scale of sexual offending is therefore difficult.…”