Effect of Indigenous status on sentence outcomes for serious assault offences

Abstract

Recent studies have found evidence of a racial bias in sentencing in Australia despite previous work showing the opposite. However, in some cases, these studies fail to adjust properly for differences in offence seriousness and in others fail to control for important covariates. Our aim in this study was to investigate the relationship between Indigenous status and likelihood of imprisonment for serious assault offences, matching on offence seriousness and controlling for additional covariates. Multivariate logistic regression with generalized estimating equations was used to explore the effect of Indigenous status on the likelihood of a prison sentence while controlling for the other sentence-relevant factors. Interaction effects were examined by fitting a logistic regression model with all covariates separately for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders and comparing the coefficient of each covariate for differences. The results show that the marginal increase in the risk of a prison sentence for Indigenous offenders is less than one percentage point (3.40% for Indigenous offenders compared with 2.45% for non-Indigenous). Significant interaction effects between Indigenous status and whether or not the offence was domestic violence related (p ¼ .024), whether or not the offence was committed after 2011 (p ¼ .020) and whether or not the offender had previously been issue a community service order for a serious assault offence (p ¼ .025) were found, each of which altered the probability of imprisonment. Despite this, no interaction effect was found that resulted in a difference in marginal probability of imprisonment greater than 1.2 percentage points between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders. We conclude that while there is a significant effect of Indigenous status on sentencing, the effect is vastly reduced when controlling for additional covariates.

Sentencing, Domestic Violence, and the Overrepresentation of Indigenous Australians: Does Court Location Matter?

“…The study had several limitations that could be addressed in future research. First, although Thorburn and Weatherburn (2018) have observed that offense history and seriousness account for disparity in Indigenous and non-Indigenous sentencing outcomes in Australia, they also note that this appears not to be the case when the principal offense is domestic violence related. In this case, differences in sentencing outcomes are observable even after adjusting for offense history and seriousness.…”

“…However, the specific contribution of sentencing to Indigenous overrepresentation is less clear. Australian research is somewhat divided on whether Indigenous people are more likely to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment even after controlling for criminal history and offense seriousness variables (Fitzgerald, 2009; Jeffries & Bond, 2012; Thorburn & Weatherburn, 2018). Yet, recent research suggests sentencing disparity may be less ambiguous in relation to domestic violence.…”

“…Yet, recent research suggests sentencing disparity may be less ambiguous in relation to domestic violence. These studies report statistical differences in sentencing outcomes for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, even after adjusting for offense seriousness and offender history, suggesting that criminal justice handling of domestic violence contributes strongly to Indigenous overrepresentation (Thorburn & Weatherburn, 2018).…”

“…For example, Ulmer and Johnson (2004) demonstrate that racial and economic inequality in sentencing outcomes in Pennsylvania are reinforced by the court-level context, rather than the “system” as a whole. Second, previous research typically focuses on prison as the sentence of interest and uses a methodology that compares imprisonment with all other noncustodial sentencing possibilities combined (Donnelly & Poynton, 2015; Jeffries & Bond, 2015; Thorburn & Weatherburn, 2018). The ability to better compare results across different sentencing outcomes may help explain any domestic violence–related disparity.…”

“…Finally, existing research focuses on sentencing disparity for domestic violence–related criminal offenses (Bond & Jeffries, 2014; Thorburn & Weatherburn, 2018); however, this overlooks the need for a focused examination of the principal legal response to domestic violence in Australian jurisdictions—civil protection orders. The domestic violence system is a hybrid including a civil domestic violence protection order (DVO), with any breach of that order potentially resulting in a criminal offense and the possibility of imprisonment among other penalties.…”