Matching Items (3)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Rape--Investigation.
- Creators: Spohn, Cassia
Description
The purpose of this project is to better understand police perceptions of sexual assault complainants by assessing their likelihood of questioning a complainant’s credibility and by examining police attitudes toward victims of sexual assault. To advance understanding of these issues, this dissertation (1) expands upon prior research by drawing on a sample of officers from one of the largest metropolitan police departments in the United States and, (2) through the use of framing theory, contributes to the literature by focusing on the attitudes of police toward sexual assault complainants and how these beliefs are shaped by day-to-day experiences.
This dissertation investigates two research questions using a mixed-methods approach. The data come from 400 sexual assault complaints that were reported to the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and 52 LAPD detective interviews. I quantitatively examine the factors that influence officer perceptions of complainant credibility, focusing on indicators of “real rape,” “genuine” victims, “inappropriate” victim behavior, and “character flaws.” I contextualize this work by examining police attitudes toward sexual assault victims using qualitative data taken from interviews of sex crimes detectives. This research contributes to the broader case processing literature by focusing on victim credibility, a factor consistently found to influence case processing decisions. Moreover, this study contributes to research on the frames officers assign to women who report sexual assault.
Analyses from the quantitative portion of the study confirm that indicators of “real rape,” and complainant “character issues” were key explanatory factors influencing credibility assessments. Regarding qualitative results, three sexual assault victim frames were identified. These frames include depictions of victims as they relate to: (a) the suspect/victim relationship, (b) problematic victim behavior, and (c) age. These three frames indicate that certain types of victims are viewed as problematic.
This dissertation contributes to three broad bodies of literature: law enforcement decision making, law enforcement perceptions of sexual assault victims, and framing theory. This dissertation was able to tap into officer attitudes to shed light on the ways officers treat women who come forward to report sexual assault, providing valuable insight into officer attitudes, credibility assessments, and victim framing.
This dissertation investigates two research questions using a mixed-methods approach. The data come from 400 sexual assault complaints that were reported to the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and 52 LAPD detective interviews. I quantitatively examine the factors that influence officer perceptions of complainant credibility, focusing on indicators of “real rape,” “genuine” victims, “inappropriate” victim behavior, and “character flaws.” I contextualize this work by examining police attitudes toward sexual assault victims using qualitative data taken from interviews of sex crimes detectives. This research contributes to the broader case processing literature by focusing on victim credibility, a factor consistently found to influence case processing decisions. Moreover, this study contributes to research on the frames officers assign to women who report sexual assault.
Analyses from the quantitative portion of the study confirm that indicators of “real rape,” and complainant “character issues” were key explanatory factors influencing credibility assessments. Regarding qualitative results, three sexual assault victim frames were identified. These frames include depictions of victims as they relate to: (a) the suspect/victim relationship, (b) problematic victim behavior, and (c) age. These three frames indicate that certain types of victims are viewed as problematic.
This dissertation contributes to three broad bodies of literature: law enforcement decision making, law enforcement perceptions of sexual assault victims, and framing theory. This dissertation was able to tap into officer attitudes to shed light on the ways officers treat women who come forward to report sexual assault, providing valuable insight into officer attitudes, credibility assessments, and victim framing.
ContributorsO'Neal, Eryn Nicole (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Committee member) / Telep, Cody (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
In recent decades, the United States has experienced a wave of immigration, an economic recession, and several terroristic attacks. In response, the government has scapegoated and blamed undocumented immigrants of color for recent social ills. As a result, a large share of government resources has been allocated to the enforcement and processing of immigration violations. Consequently, the number of immigration cases processed in U.S. federal courts has spiraled to nearly 50% of bookings and 34% of federal sentencing cases. Yet, immigration offenses have received little empirical attention in the courts and sentencing literature due in part to differences in the way immigration offenses are processed compared to other federal offense types, and relatedly, the empirical difficulties immigration offenses pose for analysis. Nevertheless, the increased representation of immigration offenses in federal courts, along with the punitive rhetoric and heightened social control targeting undocumented immigrants of color, warrants a comprehensive assessment of how immigration cases are processed in U.S. federal courts. Accordingly, this dissertation seeks to identify inequality in the processing of immigration cases by examining: 1) cumulative disadvantage within immigration cases; 2) contextual disparity and how social context interacts with ethnicity to influence multiple federal court outcomes within immigration cases; and 3) ethnic disparity within immigration cases over time.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
ContributorsBeckman, Laura Owen (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Zatz, Marjorie S. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
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