Premium
A COMPARISON OF TWO PROSECUTION POLICIES IN CASES OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE: MANDATORY CASE FILING VERSUS FOLLOWING THE VICTIM'S LEAD *
Author(s) -
DAVIS ROBERT C.,
O'SULLIVAN CHRIS S.,
FAROLE DONALD J.,
REMPEL MICHAEL
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
criminology and public policy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.6
H-Index - 33
eISSN - 1745-9133
pISSN - 1538-6473
DOI - 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00532.x
Subject(s) - dismissal , domestic violence , criminology , resource (disambiguation) , empowerment , zero tolerance , face (sociological concept) , law , political science , psychology , business , medicine , sociology , suicide prevention , medical emergency , poison control , computer network , computer science , social science
Research Summary This 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. 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.