Evidence‐Based Prosecution

• Published date: 01 August 2013
• Author: Aaron D. Buzawa,Eve S. Buzawa
• Date: 01 August 2013
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12056

POLICY ESSAY

VICTIM-CENTERED PROSECUTORIAL

POLICIES

Evidence-Based Prosecution

Is it Worth the Cost?

Eve S. Buzawa

University of Massachusetts—Lowell

Aaron D. Buzawa

United States Air Force

We believe that Finn’s(2013, this issue) article is theoretically grounded and is an

important contribution to the research measuring the effects of prosecution

policies on several key aspects of victim reabuse. It seeks to examine the

difference in outcomes between a victim-oriented approach to prosecuting domestic violence

and an evidence-based prosecution policy. Outcomes were studied between two counties

in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. “County A” had adopted an evidence-based/no-drop policy,

and “county B” had adopted a policy requiring victim concurrence in prosecution absent

other extenuating facts.

Study Findings

Finn (2013) uses sophisticated and methodologically appropriate bivariate and multivari-

ate analyses to report key victim outcomes: self-reports of both psychological and physical

aggression 6 months after the initial disposition. Finn’s logistic regression model finds that

victims in the evidence-based jurisdiction are significantly (3.76 times) more likely to report

repeat psychological aggression. In fact, being in an evidence-based jurisdiction had a greater

impact than case processing time or all the numerous control variables used, none of which

turned out to be significant.1

The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not reflect the policy or views of the U.S.

Government, or any entity therein, including the U.S. Air Force. Direct correspondence to Eve S. Buzawa,

University of Massachusetts, Lowell, School of Criminology & Justice Studies, 150 Wilder Street, Lowell, MA.

01854 (e-mail: Eve_Buzawa@uml.edu).

1. Finn (2013) reports several possible alternative factors that might have accounted for a variance in

outcomes including time from arrest to disposition, finding of a guilty plea, a sentence of incarceration,

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12056 C2013 American Society of Criminology 491

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 12 rIssue 3