Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Sexual Assault
- All Subjects: Sex Offenders
- Genre: Masters Thesis
- Creators: Spohn, Cassia
- Creators: Arenas, Lauren
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Description
The purpose of this preliminary study is to determine if sentencing disparities exist between male and female teachers who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with a student in Maricopa County, Arizona over a ten-year period. The hypothesis is that male teachers convicted of sexual misconduct with a student will receive harsher punishment than their female counterparts. In addition, this research will analyze the sentencing decisions of Arizona judges and prosecutors through plea-bargaining when compared with the presumptive sentence set by the Arizona Legislature. Issues that will be addressed include: a brief review of gender disparities in sentencing, sex offender sentencing, Arizona's rules of criminal procedure, and a review of the Arizona Revised Statutes pertaining to sexual crimes as well as the Arizona Supreme Court sentencing guidelines. The data set consists of fifteen different Maricopa County teachers who committed a sexual offense against a student and were convicted of that offense from February 2000 through September 2009. According to the results of this study, male teachers do receive harsher penalties than their female counterparts within Maricopa County.
ContributorsSimmon, Christopher (Author) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Wright, Kevin (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
While there is a good amount of research focused on sex offenders as a whole, only a limited number of studies examine variations within these offenders, how people view the variations, and why their opinions may differ. This study focuses on the interconnections among gender norms, rape myth acceptance, and the perception of sex offenders by administering an online student survey. The survey measured rape myth acceptance and adherence to traditional gender roles to see how they affected perceptions of sex offenders. Perceptions were measured using vignettes that were varied by gender and the situation described. Results showed that higher rape myth acceptance would decrease the blameworthiness of the offender, that the offender was seen as more blameworthy when the offender was a male, and that women tended to see the offender as more blameworthy than men did. The type of sexual situation did not have an impact on blameworthiness, nor did adherence to gender roles. The findings support past research that suggests that rape myth acceptance can impact people’s opinions about offenders in sexual situations and specifically that these opinions differ depending on the gender of the offender. With some offenders being viewed as more blameworthy than others, it is necessary to examine sex offense laws to see how they may disproportionately affect some offenders and implement harsher punishments than the public may deem necessary.
ContributorsArenas, Lauren (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Fradella, Henry F. (Committee member) / Stolzenberg Roosevelt, Stacia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The #MeToo Movement has sparked debate across the world as to how prevalent sexual assault is and what can be done to help survivors. Although sexual assaults are the least likely crime to be reported to police, it is important to examine the criminal justice system’s treatment of these cases. The focus of this thesis is on the prosecution of sexual assault cases. Specifically, the goal is to uncover the factors that impact prosecutorial decision-making in sexual assault cases across three different timepoints. This study examines qualitative interviews conducted in 2010 with 30 Deputy District Attorneys from Los Angeles, California. Results reveal that prosecutors’ largely rely on their “gut feelings” about whether a case will be successful based on a combination of factors, including: victim credibility, availability of evidence, and corroboration of the victim’s story, just to name a few. The study concludes with an examination of these results, a discussion on the limitations of the study and a guide for future research, and what policy changes can come from these findings.
ContributorsHale, Julianna (Author) / Talbot, Kathleen (Thesis advisor) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Following a sexual assault, victims are advised to have a medical forensic exam and undergo a sexual assault kit (SAK) collection. The SAK is then held in police storage until it undergoes testing at a crime lab. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of SAKs in the United States remain untested. This thesis examines SAK submission by organizational decision makers in sexual assault case processing. Guided by Black's theory of law, this paper seeks to examine if white and minority victims systematically experience differential access to justice in terms of getting their respective SAKs submitted. Using data from a 1982-2012 Sexual Assault Kit Backlog Study in Los Angeles, California, the current study explores the relationship between race and SAK submission, legal (eg., case specific) and extralegal (eg., victim characteristics) variables across 1,826 backlogged SAKs and 339 non-backlogged SAKs. Results from the logistic regression analysis indicate that victims of nonstranger sexual assault are more likely to experience backlog of their SAK while victim race does not appear to affect SAK submission. Implications for theory, research and criminal justice practice are discussed.
ContributorsYlang, Norah (Author) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Telep, Cody W. (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Many authors have shown that "real victim," "real rape," and traditional gender role stereotypes affect how people attribute blame to victims and perpetrators of sexual assault, and that jury decisions in rape cases are likewise influenced by extralegal factors, such as how much the victim resisted. Most studies only focus on the acceptance of rape myths and stereotypes about female victims, while myths and stereotypes about male victims are largely ignored. It is unknown how female rape myth acceptance (FRMA) and male rape myth acceptance (MRMA) may differently affect victim and perpetrator blame attributions. Whether the juror influences the effect of extra-legal factors on rape perceptions is also unknown. Using a randomized vignette design, the current study investigates 1) the effect of rape myth acceptance and gender attitudes on victim and perpetrator blame attributions, 2) how blame attributions differ by victim gender, level of resistance, and victim-perpetrator relationship, and 3) how the juror role influences the effects of rape myth acceptance and extra-legal factors on blame attributions. Results show that FRMA and MRMA are both positively associated with victim blame and negatively associated with perpetrator blame, that male victims are blamed more than female victims, and that jury membership does not influence the effect of extra-legal factors on blame attributions. Victim resistance and victim-perpetrator relationship also affected rape perceptions in unexpected ways. Implications for rape prevention programing, police and prosecutor decision-making, and jury selection are discussed.
ContributorsCoble, Suzanne St. George (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Stolzenberg Roosevelt, Stacia (Committee member) / Young, Jacob (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017