Prosecuting agencies frequently dismiss domestic violence cases due to lack of adequate evidence and limited victim participation in the case. Evidence-based prosecution asserts high quality evidence can enhance prosecutorial decision-making and reduce the reliance on victims. Video-recorded victim statements offer a potential improvement to evidence quality by capturing additional visual and factual information for prosecutors to determine applicable charges. This qualitative study examines data from six prosecution agencies in a southwestern state to understand how they use video-recorded victim statements to inform their decision-making. Findings provide preliminary evidence on the strength of video-recorded statements in offering more information on the victim, crime, and scene; strengthening negotiations with defense counsel; enhancing case strategies; and improving victim engagement. Implications for continued research and practice are discussed.
BackesB.WasimA.LaMotteJ.GrauK.WoodL.Kammer-KerwickM. (2019). Recording Victim Video Statements as Evidence to Advance Legal Outcomes in Family Violence Cases (ReVEAL): Implementation Guide for Law Enforcement, Prosecutors, and Victim Advocates. Austin, TX. Steve Hicks School of Social Work, The University of Texas at Austin.
3.
BennettL.GoodmanL.DuttonM. A. (1999). Systemic obstacles to the criminal prosecution of a battering partner: A victim perspective. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(7), 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626099014007006
4.
BinderA.MeekerJ. (1992). The development of social attitudes towards spousal abuse. In BuzawaE. S.BuzawaC. G. (Eds.), Domestic violence: The changing criminal justice response (pp. 3–19). Auburn House.
5.
BondC. E. W.JeffriesS. (2014). Similar punishment? Comparing sentencing outcomes in domestic and non-domestic violence cases. The British Journal of Criminology, 54(5), 849–872. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azu034
6.
BuzawaE. S.BuzawaC. G. (2003). Family violence: The criminal justice response (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
7.
CampbellJ. C.WebsterD. W.GlassN. (2009). The danger assessment: Validation of a lethality risk assessment instrument for intimate partner femicide. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(4), 653–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260508317180
8.
CattaneoL. B.ChapmanA. R. (2010). The process of empowerment: A model for use in research and practice. American Psychologist, 65(7), 646–659. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018854
9.
CattaneoL. B.GoodmanL. A. (2005). Risk factors for reabuse in intimate partner violence: A cross-disciplinary critical review. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 6(2), 141–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838005275088
10.
CerulliC.KothariC. L.DichterM.MarcusS.WileyJ.RhodesK. V. (2014). Victim participation in intimate partner violence prosecution: Implications for safety. Violence Against Women, 20(5), 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801214535105
11.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE Publications.
CrowM. S.AdrionB. (2011). Focal concerns and police use of force: Examining the factors associated with Taser use. Police Quarterly, 14(4), 366–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611111423740
14.
DavisR. C.O’SullivanC. S.FaroleD. J.RempelM. (2008). A comparison of two prosecution policies in cases of intimate partner violence: Mandatory case filing versus following the victim’s lead. Criminology & Public Policy, 7(4), 633–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00532.x
15.
DavisR. C.SmithB. E.TaylorB. (2003). Increasing the proportion of family violence arrests that are prosecuted: A natural experiment in Milwaukee. Criminology & Public Policy, 2(2), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2003.tb00125.x
DawsonM.DinovitzerR. (2001). Victim cooperation and the prosecution of domestic violence in a specialized court. Justice Quarterly, 18(3), 593–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100095031
ErezE.BelknapJ. (1998). In their own words: Battered women’s assessment of the criminal processing system’s responses. Violence and Victims, 13, 251–268. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.13.3.251
20.
FinnM. A. (2013). Overview of: “Evidence-Based and victim-centered prosecutorial policies: Examination of deterrent and therapeutic jurisprudence effects on Domestic Violence”. Criminology & Public Policy, 12(3), 441–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12046
21.
FordD. A. (2003). Coercing victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(6), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260503253872
22.
FryeV.HavilandM.RajahV. (2007). Dual arrest and other unintended consequences of mandatory arrest in New York City: A brief report. Journal of Family Violence, 22(6), 397–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-007-9094-y
23.
GarnerJ. H.MaxwellC. D. (2009). Prosecution and conviction rates for intimate partner violence. Criminal Justice Review, 34(1), 44–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016808324231
24.
GewirtzA.WeidnerR. R.MillerH.ZehmK. (2006). Domestic violence cases involving children: Effects of an evidence-based prosecution approach. Violence and Victims, 21(2), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1891/088667006780644262
HanE. L. (2003). Mandatory arrest and no-drop policies: Victim empowerment in domestic violence cases. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 23(1), 159–192.
HareS. C. (2010). Intimate partner violence: Victims’ opinions about going to trial. Journal of Family Violence, 25(8), 765–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-010-9334-4
29.
HenningK.FederL. (2005). Criminal prosecution of family violence offenses: An investigation of factors predictive of court outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32(6), 612–642. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854805279945
30.
HirschelD.BuzawaE.PattavinaA.FaggianiD. (2007). Family 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.
31.
HorwitzS. H.MitchellD.LaRussa-TrottM.SantiagoL.PearsonJ.SkiffD. M.CerulliC. (2011). An inside view of police officers’ experience with domestic violence. Journal of Family Violence, 26(8), 617–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-011-9396-y
32.
HovmandP. S.FordD. N.FlomI.KyriakakisS. (2009). Victims arrested for domestic violence: Unintended consequences of arrest policies. System Dynamics Review, 25(3), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.418
KaiserK. A.O’NealE. N.SpohnC. (2017). “Victim refuses to cooperate”: A focal concerns analysis of victim cooperation in sexual assault cases. Victims & Offenders, 12(2), 297–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2015.1078864
35.
LeventhalJ. M.AldrichL. (2006). The admission of evidence in domestic violence cases after Crawford v. Washington: A national survey. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 11, 77–100.
36.
MessingJ. T. (2014). Evidence-based prosecution of intimate partner violence in the post-Crawford era: A single-city study of the factors leading to prosecution. Crime and Delinquency, 60(2), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710362056
37.
MillerS. L. (1989). Unintended side effects of pro-arrest policies and their race and class implications for battered women: A cautionary note. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 3(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/088740348900300305
38.
MillsL. G. (1998). Mandatory arrest and prosecution policies for domestic violence: A critical literature review and the case for more research to test victim empowerment approaches. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25(3), 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854898025003002
39.
MooreD.SinghR. (2018). Seeing crime, feeling crime: Visual evidence, emotions, and the prosecution of domestic violence. Theoretical Criminology, 22(1), 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480616684194
40.
MorrowW. J.KatzC. M.ChoateD. E. (2016). Assessing the impact of police body-worn cameras on arresting, prosecuting, and convicting suspects of intimate partner violence. Police Quarterly, 19(3), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611116652850
41.
NelsonE. L. (2013). Police controlled antecedents which significantly elevate prosecution and conviction rates in domestic violence cases. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 13(5), 526–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895812462594
42.
NicholsA. J. (2014). No-drop prosecution in domestic violence cases: Survivor-defined and social change approaches to victim advocacy. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(11), 2114–2142. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0886260513516385
43.
OwensC.MannD.McKennaR. (2014). The Essex body worn video trial: The impact of body worn video on criminal justice outcomes of domestic abuse incidents. College of Policing.
44.
O’NealE. N.BeckmanL. O.SpohnC. (2019). The sexual stratification hypothesis: Is the decision to arrest influenced by the victim/suspect racial/ethnic dyad?Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(6), 1287–1310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516651093
PetersonR. R.Bialo-PadinD. (2012). Domestic violence Is different: The crucial role of evidence collection in domestic violence cases. Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, 12(2), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332586.2012.717047
47.
PinchevskyG. M. (2017). Understanding decision-making in specialized domestic violence courts: Can contemporary theoretical frameworks help guide these decisions?Violence Against Women, 23(6), 749–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216648792
48.
RayB.DollarC. B. (2013). Examining mental health court completion: A focal concerns perspective. Sociological Quarterly, 54(4), 647–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/tsq.12032
49.
ReavesB. A. (2017). Police response to domestic violence, 2006-2015. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/prdv0615.pdf
50.
SaldañaJ. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE publications.
ShermanL. W.BerkR. A. (1984b). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095575
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36(4), 763–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01265.x
55.
TatumK. M.PenceR. (2015). Factors that affect the arrest decision in domestic violence cases. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 38(1), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.1108/pijpsm-07-2014-0075
TracyS. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121
58.
Violence against Women Act of 1994. (1994). Title IV, P.L. 103-322, 108 stat. 1902.
59.
Violence against Women Act of 2000. (2000). P.L. 106-386, 114 stat. 1464.
60.
Violence against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. (2006). P.L. 109-162, 119 stat. 2961.
61.
WesteraN. J.PowellM. B. (2017). Prosecutors’ perceptions of how to improve the quality of evidence in domestic violence cases. Policing & Society, 27(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2015.1039002
