This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by CRAMER, E. P. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by CRAMER, E. P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Variables That Predict Verdicts in Domestic Violence Cases

Virginia Commonwealth University

Literature on the prosecution of domestic violence cases tends to focus on prosecution strategies or policies, and prosecutorial discretion. There is a dearth of studies concerning factors that are associated with verdicts in domestic violence trials. This study of 140 domestic violence cases appearing before the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court in Chesterfield County, Virginia, examines the demographic and court process variables that are associated with particular verdicts in domestic violence offenses. A discriminant function analysis determined that five variables can predict verdicts: race of perpetrator, gender of perpetrator, relationship between victim and perpetrator, previous criminal history, and availability of Polaroid pictures of the crime for use as evidence. The typical guilty case was a White male, married to or living with the victim, with a previous criminal history, and whose case file included Polaroid pictures of the crime.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 14, No. 11, 1137-1150 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/088626099014011002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. H. Garner and C. D. Maxwell Prosecution and Conviction Rates for Intimate Partner Violence Criminal Justice Review, March 1, 2009; 34(1): 44 - 79. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Kern, T. M. Libkuman, and S. L. Temple Perceptions of Domestic Violence and Mock Jurors' Sentencing Decisions J Interpers Violence, December 1, 2007; 22(12): 1515 - 1535. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. Zoe Hilton, G. T. Harris, and M. E. Rice The Effect of Arrest On Wife Assault Recidivism: Controlling for Pre-Arrest Risk Criminal Justice and Behavior, October 1, 2007; 34(10): 1334 - 1344. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dinovitzer and M. Dawson Family-Based Justice in the Sentencing of Domestic Violence Br. J. Criminol., July 1, 2007; 47(4): 655 - 670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Romkens Protecting Prosecution: Exploring the Powers of Law in an Intervention Program for Domestic Violence Violence Against Women, February 1, 2006; 12(2): 160 - 186. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Henning and L. Feder Criminal Prosecution of Domestic Violence Offenses: An Investigation of Factors Predictive of Court Outcomes Criminal Justice and Behavior, December 1, 2005; 32(6): 612 - 642. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. A. Ventura and G. Davis Domestic Violence: Court Case Conviction and Recidivism Violence Against Women, February 1, 2005; 11(2): 255 - 277. [Abstract] [PDF]