Deterring domestic violence: Do criminal sanctions reduce repeat offenses?
- 1.4k Downloads
This study presents an empirical analysis of domestic violence case resolution in North Carolina for the years 2004 to 2010. The key hypothesis is that penalties at the level set for domestic violence crimes reduce recidivism (re-arrest on domestic violence charges or conviction in 2 years following an index arrest). We use state court data for all domestic violence-related arrests. Decisions to commit an act of domestic violence are based on a Bayesian process of updating subjective beliefs. Individuals have prior beliefs about penalties for domestic violence based on actual practice in their areas. An individual’s experience with an index arrest leads to belief updating. To address endogeneity of case outcomes, we use an instrumental variables strategy based on decisions of prosecutors and judges assigned to each index arrest in our sample. Contrary to our hypothesis, we find that penalities, at least as set at the current levels, do not deter future arrests and convictions.
KeywordsCrime Domestic violence Deterrence Subjective beliefs Prosecutors Judges
JEL ClassificationK14 K36 K42
- Apel, R. (2012). Sanctions, perceptions, and crime: Implications for criminal deterrence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10940-012-9170-1.
- Black, M. C., & Breiding, M. J. (2008). Adverse health conditions and health risk behaviors associated with intimate partner violence-United States, 2005. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 57(5), 113–115.Google Scholar
- Centers for Disease Control. (2003). In Dept of Health and Human Services (Ed.), Costs of intimate partner violence against women in the United States. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control.Google Scholar
- Charles, K., & Durlauf, S. (2012). Pitfalls in the use of time series methods to study deterrence and capital punishment. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. doi:10.1007/s10940-012-9169-7. 1–22.
- DeRiviere, L. (2008). Do economists need to rethink their approaches to modeling intimate partner violence? Journal of Economic Issues, 42(3), 583–606.Google Scholar
- Dube, S. R., Anda, R. F., Felitti, V. J., Edwards, V. J., & Williamson, D. F. (2002). Exposure to abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction among adults who witnessed intimate partner violence as children: Implications for health and social services. Violence and Victims, 17(1), 3–17. doi:10.1891/vivi.188.8.131.52635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ehrlich, I. (1981). On the usefulness of controlling individuals: An economic analysis of rehabilitation, incapacitation, and deterrence. American Economic Review, 71(3), 307–322.Google Scholar
- Fagan, J. (1996). The criminalization of domestic violence: Promises and limits. In NIJ (Ed.), NIJ Research Report.Google Scholar
- Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., et al. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258. doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00017-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gilles, S. G. (2006). The judgment-proof society. Washington and Lee Law Review, 63(2), 603–718.Google Scholar
- Hanson, R. K., & Wallace-Carpretta, S. (2004). Predictors of criminal recidivism among male batterers. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10(4), 413–427. doi:10.1080/10683160310001629283.
- Hirschel, D., Buzawa, E., Pattavina, A., & Don, F. (2007). Domestic violence and mandatory arrest laws: To what extent do they influence police arrest decisions? The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 98(1), 255–298.Google Scholar
- Kim, J., & Starsoneck, L. (2007). NC District courts’ response to domestic violence: Report regarding best practices and judicial training. Raleigh.Google Scholar
- Klein, A. R. (2004). The criminal justice response to domestic violence. Mason: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
- Levitt, S. D., & Miles, T. J. (2007). Empirical study of criminal punishment. In A. M. Polinsky, & S. Shavell (Eds.), Handbook of law and economics (Vol. 1, pp. 455–495). Elsevier.Google Scholar
- North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Committee. (2009). Structured sentencing: Training and reference manual. In N. C. Courts (Ed.).Google Scholar
- North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts. (2011). North Carolina Courts Annual Report: July 2, 2010–June 30, 2011. In N. C. J. Department (Ed.), (pp. 20). North Carolina.Google Scholar
- North Carolina Office of Indigent Defense Services. (2011). North Carolina’s Criminal Justice System: A comparison of prosecution and indigent defense resources. (pp. 10). Durham, NC.Google Scholar
- Paternoster, R. (2010). How much do we really know about criminal deterrence? The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 100(3), 765–823.Google Scholar
- Polinsky, A. M., & Shavell, S. (2007). The theory of public enforcement of law. In A. M. Polinsky, & S. Shavell (Eds.), Handbook of law and economics (Vol. 1, pp. 403–454). Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Rennison, C. M., & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate partner violence. Bureau of Justice Statistics: Special Report, NCJ 178247.Google Scholar
- Simon, L. M. J., Ellwanger, S. J., & Haggerty, J. (2010). Reversing the historical tide of iatrogenic harm: A therapeutic jurisprudence analysis of increases in arrests of domestic batterers and rapists. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33(5–6), 306–320. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2010.09.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner violence. In CDC/NIJ (Ed.), Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey.Google Scholar
- United States Census Bureau. (2011). Population by Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin, for all Ages and for 18 Years and Over, for North Carolina: 2000 and 2010. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- United States Census Bureau. (2010). The United States Census 2010. http://2010.census.gov/2010census/. Accessed July 31, 2012.
- Viscusi, W. K., & O’Connor, C. J. (1984). Adaptive responses to chemical labeling: Are workers Bayesian decision makers? American Economic Review, 74(5), 942–956.Google Scholar