Matching Items (30)
Description
Child advocacy centers provide a safe, child-friendly environment for the forensic interview and subsequent investigation of child victimization cases. However, very little research has examined the effects of burnout, secondary trauma, and organizational stressors on forensic interviewers. The goal of the present project was addressing the following research questions. Do forensic interviewers experience burnout and secondary trauma associated with their profession? How do organizational stressors mitigate or increase these effects among forensic interviewers? Data was collected by conducting an online survey of forensic interviewers working at child advocacy centers across the United States. Specifically, burnout was measured with the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory, and secondary trauma was measured with the Secondary Traumatic Stress Scale (STSS). The current study utilized bivariate correlations, and OLS regression models to analyze the effects of burnout, secondary trauma, and organizational stressors on forensic interviewers. The results indicate burnout and secondary trauma among interviewers in the sample. Job support, funding constraints, and heavy caseloads all influence the outcome measures. Policy recommendations include continued education, training, and mental health services for forensic interviewers. Future researchers should conduct qualitative interviews and expand on variables within the current dataset such as note taking, peer evaluations, and forensic interviewing protocols in order to gain further insight into this population.
ContributorsStarcher, Destinee (Author) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Thesis advisor) / Telep, Cody (Committee member) / Young, Jacob (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
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
Does Precrime mesh with the ideals of U.S. Justice? The fictional predictive police force of Philip K. Dick's "Minority Report" may be the gold standard for crime prevention in science fiction, but could such system actually exist in harmony with U.S. standards of justice? By first exploring the philosophical foundations for punishment and blame in the United States, a characterization of the U.S.'s ideals for justice is established. Then, given the role that databases play in crime-fighting today, especially in establishing probable cause for lawful arrests, it is argued that databases with predictive power could in fact give rise to police force that resembles Precrime, with some complications. How the predictions are interpreted under the law in order to give them legal basis in establishing probable cause is explained, with several potential possibilities produced. These avenues for preemptive arrest approach the realm of Precrime, but lack Precrime's level of security. Other forms of preemptive detention that are currently in use are explored, mainly involuntary civil commitment, in order to find a potential form that a more extreme Precrime may take in the U.S. Finally, the limits of Precrime are explained, with some caveats and concluding comments on the potential for abuse and misuse of predictive policing.
ContributorsPolansky, Jackson Harold (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Suk, Mina (Committee member) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
The Zero Tolerance Policy began appearing in secondary schools in the early 1990's. In the late 1980's, crimes committed by juveniles were at an all-time high. Fears that the violence would spill onto campus propelled lawmakers and school officials to take preventative measures. With the creation of the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1990 and Gun-Free Act of 1994, any individual caught with a weapon on campus would be found in violation of the Act and be punishable by law. In addition to the Acts, School Resource Officers (SROs) became more prominent on campus. SROs were originally on campus to teach drug prevention programs, however SROs began to take on more of a disciplinary role to support the Zero Tolerance Policy. Furthermore, educators began turning towards SROs to handle less serious incidents such as behavioral outbursts. As SROs took a more active role, arrests among students started to rise. Many think this is a direct pathway to our criminal justice system, more commonly known as the school-to-prison pipeline. This pipeline disproportionately affects African Americans. This paper will examine the creation, aims and purpose of the Zero Tolerance Policy as well as what incidents helped create and install the policy. This paper will look at what the Zero Tolerance Policy looks like since it has been enacted. Moreover, there will be a focus on which students are affected the most and if this policy will lead to criminal justice contact in the future. Lastly, alternatives to the Zero Tolerance Policy will be discussed and if the policy can be improved or should it be eliminated.
ContributorsSoto, Tatyana E. (Author) / Sweeten, Gary (Thesis director) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Committee member) / School of Social Work (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is an organization dedicated to defending student and faculty freedom of speech rights on college campuses in the United States. Their work has brought national attention and debate around how unbiased the foundation truly is. This thesis discusses the relevant cases around the freedom of speech such as United States v. O'Brien and Matal v. Tam in order to develop an understanding of general free speech protection. Free speech cases specifically regarding school campuses were analyzed such as Tinker v. Des Moines, Bethel v. Fraser, and Rosenberger v. University of Virginia to show the limitations of what FIRE can fight on campuses. FIRE's case selection methods were analyzed, and a bias toward conservative cases was found. This bias is disputed by FIRE supporters as natural given the liberal nature of higher education, but data surrounding professors, disinvitation attempts, and student opinions invalidate these claims. Three FIRE cases (Roberts v. Haragan, Smith v. Tarrant County College District, and the Dixie State Incident) were analyzed to show the progression and style of the foundation through the years and how they developed their aggressive and bully reputation. Finally, current large incidents of free speech oppression were analyzed to understand how they skew and affect public perception of the overall struggle for freedom of speech on college campuses. This thesis found that FIRE is in fact biased and that their efforts to make positive change are undermined by this. Keywords: FIRE, free speech, First Amendment
ContributorsRamos-Mata, Joseph Wilfrido (Author) / von Delden, Jayn (Thesis director) / Fradella, Hank (Committee member) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-12
Description
It is a tragic reality that many individuals in the criminal justice system suffer from a mental illness. As a result, both mental health programs and mental health courts have been developed in response to the increasing number of individuals in the criminal justice system that are suffering from a mental illness. The first objective of this review is to discuss the background on mental illness as it relates to the criminal justice population, and to understand the common causes of incarceration amongst the mentally ill, including the deinstitutionalization movement of the 1960s, the unavailability of intermediate and long-term hospitalization in state hospitals, more formal and rigid criteria for civil commitment, a lack of adequate support systems and access to mental health treatment in the community, and the high recidivism rates by these types of offenders. Considering these causes, another objective of this review is to compare and contrast the United States' first mental health courts, including those in Broward County, Florida, King County, Washington, San Bernardino, California, and Anchorage, Alaska, by ultimately focusing on the origins of each court, the stages of intervention, methods of entry, competency evaluations, treatment approaches, and disposition of charges. From there, this review considers the differences between the courts and proceeds with a synthesis of the common and recurring themes between them, and then ends with recommendations specific to the mental health court system on practices that can be implemented or altered in order to encourage a more effective form of justice for the mentally ill, and a discussion of the policy solutions that have already been proposed to address the problem.
ContributorsReynolds, Dylan Marie (Author) / Johnson, Eric (Thesis director) / Fradella, Hank (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
Hip-hop’s popularity has been steadily increasing since the late 1980s, with it becoming the most streamed genre of music in 2017. This rise in popularity is matched by an increase in the number of criminal court cases which implement one of hip-hop’s primary features, rap, as evidence. In order to build upon prior research regarding rap music’s implications in legal proceedings and begin to understand what impact this phenomenon might have, this study examines the function of rap music within a sample of court cases. The research was conducted using a qualitative content analysis. The sample consists of 184 criminal cases from a five-year-period selected from the LexisNexis®Academic database. From these cases, 7 principal patterns were established: (1) gang affiliation, (2) descriptions of criminal acts, (3) impermissible character evidence, (4) criminal intent, (5) threats, (6) artistic expression, and (7) inciting incidents. Each of these patterns was examined and analyzed with respect to the function of rap evidence within each case. Among these patterns, the most common was rap evidence bearing gang affiliation, and the least common was rap’s direct use in incidents which resulted in a criminal charge. Most cases, with its use as a threat being the major exception, appeared to implement rap as a supplementary piece of evidence. The analysis demonstrated that the increased usage of rap evidence in the criminal proceedings attests to the significant impact that the hip-hop genre can have a have on individual cases. This impact is defined by the function of rap evidence, and in this sense the contextual and historical significance of rap music becomes a factor in how it is utilized as a tool in the legal system.
ContributorsLutes, Erin (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Fahmy, Chantal (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
This study examined the type and frequency of questions asked by attorneys in cases of children alleging sexual abuse. Of interest was whether child age would affect the questions asked. The participants included 25 child witnesses testifying in criminal trials in Maricopa County over a recent ten-year period. Children were placed into two groups: younger (five to seven-year-olds) and older (eight to nine-year-olds). Every question asked, and answer provided, during children's testimony, was systematically and reliably coded for the content of the interaction. Attorneys exhibited developmental sensitivity, varying the amount of question they asked across content areas by the age of the child. In addition, attorneys varied in what they asked about: the prosecution focused more on the plausibility of abuse, whereas the defense focused more on how others may have suggestively influenced the child's report. Both attorneys were equally concerned about the consistency of narratives. The findings from the present study have direct policy implications for how attorneys structure their arguments, both in an attempt to establish, and question, children's credibility in these important cases. Keywords: children, age, suggestibility, consistency, inconsistency, plausibility
ContributorsHogan, Caitlyn Rose (Author) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Thesis director) / Fradella, Hank (Committee member) / College of Public Service and Community Solutions (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
This research study looked at frequency and proportion of suggestive questions (negative term, statement, and tag), the age of the child, and the attorney conducting the examination (prosecution versus defense). The population of this study was obtained from Maricopa County Attorney's Office court transcripts from 2005-2015 and the sample included 64 minors between the ages of 5-12 years old. The present study showed that regarding frequency, there was no significant difference between the number of suggestive questions asked by the prosecution and defense, however, when looked at the proportion of these questions, prosecution asked significantly fewer suggestive questions compared to the defense. Older children (9-12 year olds) receive more, both in terms of frequency and proportion, suggestive questions than younger children (5-8 year olds). Lastly, children typically gave elaborate responses to suggestive questions from the defense more than from the prosecution. This study shows that attorneys are using problematic methods when questioning children between the ages of 5-12 years old and these suggestive methods may affect the child's ability to provide credible testimony.
ContributorsMcDonald, Ashley (Author) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Thesis director) / Fradella, Hank (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor)
Created2018-12
Description
By providing vignettes with manipulated scientific evidence, this research examined if including more or less scientific detail affected decision-making in regards to the death penalty. Participants were randomly assigned one of the two manipulations (less science and more science) after reading a short scenario introducing the mock capital trial and their role as jury members. Survey respondents were told that a jury had previously found the defendant guilty and they would now deliberate the appropriate punishment. Before being exposed to the manipulation, respondents answered questions pertaining to their prior belief in the death penalty, as well as their level of support of procedural justice and science. These questions provided a baseline to compare to their sentencing decision. Participants were then asked what sentence they would impose \u2014 life in prison or death \u2014 and how the fMRI evidence presented by an expert witness for the defense affected their decision. Both quantitative and qualitative measures were used to identify how the level of scientific detail affected their decision. Our intended predictor variable (level of scientific detail) did not affect juror decision-making. In fact, the qualitative results revealed a variety of interpretations of the scientific evidence used both in favor of death and in favor of life. When looking at what did predict juror decision-making, gender, prior belief in the death penalty, and political ideology all were significant predictors. As in previous literature, the fMRI evidence in our study had mixed results with regards to implementation of the death penalty. This held true in both of our manipulations, showing that despite the level of detail in evidence intended for mitigation, jurors with preconceived notions may still disregard the evidence, and some jurors may even view it is aggravating and thus increase the likelihood of a death sentence for a defendant with such brain abnormalities.
ContributorsBerry, Megan Cheyenne (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Pardini, Dustin (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12