The Impact of Victim Demographics on Case Outcomes in Delinquency Proceedings: An Empirical Test

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12026
• Published date: 01 April 2015
• Author: M. Dyan McGuire,Norman White,Kenneth Mayo,Noelle E. Fearn,Megan Ondr
• Date: 01 April 2015

The Impact of Victim Demographics on Case

Outcomes in Delinquency Proceedings:

An Empirical Test

By M. Dyan McGuire, Noelle E. Fearn, Norman White, Kenneth Mayo, and Megan Ondr

ABSTRACT

While the impact of the defendant’s sex and race on processing decisions is well

researched, less is known about the impact of the victim’s sex and race on juvenile

court decision making. Using data from the juvenile court in St. Louis, Missouri, this

study explores direct and interactive effects of the victim’s sex and race on outcome

decisions for juvenile offenders. Findings suggest that legal differences account for

most of the observed differences in detention, commitment and adjudication among

the sample studied.

INTRODUCTION

When people think of the criminal justice system, they often think of defendants.

The Due Process Revolution of the 1960s, for example, was primarily focused on

ensuring that defendants’ rights were protected during criminal and delinquency

M. Dyan McGuire, Ph.D., J.D., is an associate professor of criminal justice at Saint Louis University.

Prior to teaching, she worked as a prosecutor, criminal defense attorney and judicial clerk. Her research

interests include juvenile justice, race and sex discrimination within the criminal justice system and violence

as it impacts upon women both as victims and perpetrators. Correspondence: mcguired@slu.edu

Noelle E. Fearn, Ph.D., is an associate professor of criminal justice at Saint Louis University and is

the Director of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Program. Her research interests include criminal

justice decision making, sentencing and punishment outcomes, correctional treatment of offenders and

juvenile justice processing and outcomes.

Norman White, Ph.D., is an associate professor of criminal justice at Saint Louis University. He

worked extensively in the juvenile justice system before entering the academy. He is actively involved with

community groups working to aid children who are at risk. His research interests include developmental and

life-course predictors, theories of delinquent and antisocial behavior, race and crime and communities and

crime.

Megan Ondr, M.S.W., is a graduate of Saint Louis University’s School of Social Work. She worked as

a graduate assistant on this project.

Kenneth Mayo, M.S., is a research analyst for the St. Louis Family Court.

bs_bs_banner

Juvenile and Family Court Journal 66, No. 2 (Spring) 1

© 2015 National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges

proceedings. Most of the jurisprudence concerning criminal law and procedure remains

focused on defendants. Yet, despite the emphasis on defendants and their rights, the

rights and concerns of victims have, at times, received attention as well. The Victim’s

Rights Movements of the 1990s is perhaps the most prominent example of victims

moving to the center of public discourse and legislative attention concerning the criminal

justice system.

This lack of sustained and overt public attention to victims may help to explain

why criminologists have tended to primarily focus on defendants as well. Much of the

criminological literature examines how defendants’ demographic statuses impact upon

case processing and outcome decisions. While defendants have tended to take center

stage, at certain times and in certain contexts, the role of victims has also received

attention. This study seeks to expand our understanding of the impact victims have at

several stages of formal delinquency proceedings. Specifically, this study examines the

impact of victims’ sex, race and age on case outcomes including detention, adjudication

and commitment.

THEORETICAL EXPLANTIONS

A number of theoretical frameworks have been advanced to explain how the

juvenile and adult criminal justice systems interact with various individual level statuses,

primarily sex and race, to inform and affect criminal and juvenile justice decision making.

Theoretical predictions often conflict, especially when attempting to explain gender or

sex effects. One of the oldest theoretical paradigms suggests that when dealing with

females, the system behaves chivalrously (Pollak, 1961). Chivalry on the part of males, it

is argued, provides a leniency dividend to girls at each stage of the process (see, Cavan,

1962). In essence, the chivalry hypothesis suggests that when given a choice, actors

within the juvenile justice system will exercise their discretion to treat female offenders

less severely than similarly situated males.

Chivalry, as applied to victims, suggests that those who victimize girls or women

will receive harsher treatment than those who victimize boys or men because actors

within the system feel a special need to protect females and regard offending against them

as particularly egregious (Curry, Lee, & Rodriguez, 2004). “Chivalry also implies that the

most severe sentences would be meted out to male offenders who victimize females”

(Curry, Lee & Rodriguez, 2004, p. 323).

Ideas akin to chivalry have been reconceptualized as paternalism in more modern

research but still rest on the premise that females are regarded as somehow weaker or less

competent and in special need of the guidance, control and/or protection of males and

institutions dominated by males (Franklin & Fearn, 2008). It has also been theorized that

chivalry or paternalism may translate into harsher sentences for those who victimize

females through a process of attribution whereby those who victimize females are seen as

more blameworthy (Baumer, Messner, & Felson, 2000; Curry, Lee, & Rodriguez, 2004).

Conflict theories based upon gender reject the notion that females are accorded

special protection and privilege and assert instead that sexism or misogyny characterizes

2 | JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL / Spring 2015