Research consistently shows attrition rates for sexual assault cases remain high. Previous research has focused on law enforcement and case processing of these crimes, but little is known about convictions. This study utilized prosecutorial case files from a large county district attorney’s office in a southern state to examine differences across racial dyads on the relative risk of conviction for sexual assault. The findings generally demonstrate that race and ethnicity remain significant extralegal variables associated with criminal case processing, specifically convictions. Our results show important differences across inter- and intra-racial dyads, and regarding other legal and extralegal factors, on this outcome. Implications of the findings and suggestions for addressing the concerns are provided.
Adam-CurtisL.ForbesG. (2004). College women’s experiences of sexual coercion: A review of cultural, perpetrator, victim, and situational variables. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5(2), 91–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838003262331
2.
AlbonettiC. (1987). Prosecutorial discretion: The effects of uncertainty. Law & Society Review, 21, 291–313.
3.
AlderdenM. A.UllmanS. E. (2012). Creating a more complete and current picture: Examining police and prosecutor decision-making when processing sexual assault cases. Violence Against Women, 18, 525–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212453867
4.
AllisonP. D. (2009). Missing data. In MillsapR. E.Maydeu-OlivaresA. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 72–89). Sage Publications Ltd.
BeichnerD.SpohnC. (2005). Prosecutorial charging decisions in sexual assault cases: Examining the impact of a specialized prosecution unit. Criminal Justice Police Review, 16, 461–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403405277195
8.
BeichnerD.SpohnC. (2012). Modeling the effects of victim behavior and moral character on prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Violence and Victims, 27, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.27.1.3
9.
BouffardJ. (2000). Predicting type of sexual assault case closure from victim, suspect, and case characteristics. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352(00)00068-4
BrydenD. P.LengnickS. (1997). Rape in the criminal justice system. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87(4), 1194–1384.
12.
BushwayS. D.ForstB. (2013). Studying discretion in the processes that generate criminal justice sanctions. Justice Quarterly, 30, 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.682604
13.
CampbellR. (1998). The community response to rape: Victims’ experiences with the legal, medical, and mental health systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 355–379. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022155003633
14.
CampbellR.PattersonD.BybeeD.DworkinE. R. (2009). Predicting sexual assault prosecution outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(7), 712–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809335054
15.
CampbellR.WascoS. M.AhrensC. E.SeflT.BarnesH. E. (2001). Preventing the “second rape”: Rape survivors’ experiences with community service providers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1239–1259. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626001016012002
16.
CassidyM.RydbergJ. (2018). Analyzing variation in prior record penalties across conviction offenses. Crime & Delinquency, 64(7), 831–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128717693215
17.
Centers for Disease Control National Center for Injury and Prevention. (2019). Attempted or completed non-fatal sexual assault rate in the U.S. U.S. Government Printing Office.
18.
CrossT. P.SillerL.VlajnicM.AlderdenM. (2022). The relationship of DNA evidence to prosecution outcomes in sexual assault cases. Violence Against Women, 28(15–16), 3910–3932. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012221077124
19.
DiamondB.BowenK.BurnsR. (2022). Factors affecting sexual assault case processing: Charging through sentencing in a large southern county. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(13–14), NP11605–NP11627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260521993923
20.
Du MontJ.MyhrT. L. (2000). So few convictions: The role of client-related characteristics in the legal processing of sexual assaults. Violence Against Women, 6, 1109–1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010022183541
21.
EstrichS. (1987). Real rape. Harvard University Press.
22.
FansherA. K.WelshB. (2023). A decade of decision making: Prosecutorial decision making in sexual assault cases. Social Sciences, 12(6), 348. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060348
23.
FisherB. S.DaigleL. E.CullenF. T. (2008). Rape against women: What can research offer to guide the development of prevention programs and risk reduction interventions?Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 14, 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986208315482
24.
FrazierP. A.HaneyB. (1996). Sexual assault cases in the legal system: Police, prosecutor, and victim perspectives. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 607–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499234
25.
FrohmannL. (1991). Discrediting victims’ allegations of sexual assault: Prosecutorial accounts of case rejections. Social Problems, 38, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1991.38.2.03a00070
26.
FrohmannL. (1997). Convictability and discordant locales: Reproducing race, class, and gender ideologies in prosecutorial decision-making. Law & Society Review, 31(3), 531–556. https://doi.org/10.2307/3054045
GrubbA.TurnerE. (2012). Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the impact of rape myth acceptance, gender role conformity and substance use on victim blaming. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 443–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.002
30.
HenningK.FederL. (2005). Criminal prosecution of domestic violence offenses: An investigation of factors predictive of court outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 612–642. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854805279945
31.
HolleranD.BeichnerD.SpohnC. (2010). Examining charging agreement between police and prosecutors in rape cases. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 385–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707308977
32.
HorneyJ.SpohnC. (1996). The influence of blame and believability factors on the processing of simple versus aggravated rape cases. Criminology, 34, 135–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1996.tb01200.x
IrvingT. (2008). Decoding Black women: Policing practices and rape prosecution on the streets of Philadelphia. NWSA Journal, 20(2), 100–120. https://doi.org/10.1353/ff.2008.a247356
35.
KerstetterW. A. (1990). Gateway to justice: Police and prosecutorial response to sexual assaults against women. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81, 267–313.
36.
KingsnorthR.LopezJ.WentworthJ.CummingsD. (1998). Adult sexual assault: The role of racial/ethnic composition in prosecuting and sentencing. Journal of Criminal Justice, 26, 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2352(98)00012-9
37.
KingsnorthR.MacIntoshR.WentworthJ. (1999). Sexual assault: The role of prior relationship and victim characteristics in case processing. Justice Quarterly, 16, 275–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829900094141
38.
LaFreeG. (1989). Rape and criminal justice: The social construction of sexual assault. Wadsworth.
39.
LievoreD. (2004). Victim credibility in adult sexual assault cases. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 288, 2–6.
40.
LohW. D. (1980). The impact of common law and reform rape statutes on prosecution: An empirical study. Washington Law Review, 55, 543–562.
41.
LongL. M.UllmanS. E.StarzynskiL. L.MasonG. E. (2007). Age and educational differences in African American women’s sexual assault experiences. Feminist Criminology, 2, 117–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085106296583
42.
LonswayK. A.ArchambaultJ. (2012). The “justice gap” for sexual assault cases: Future directions for research and reform. Violence Against Women, 18, 145–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212440017
43.
McCahillT.MeyerL.FischmanA. (1979). The aftermath of rape. Lexington Books.
44.
McCormickJ. S.MaricA.SetoM. C.BarbareeH. E. (1998). Relationship to victim predicts sentence length in sexual assault cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(3), 413–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626098013003007
MorabitoM. S.WilliamsL. M.PattavinaA. (2019). Decision making in sexual assault cases: Replication research on sexual violence case attrition in the U.S. Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252689.pdf
47.
MosleyE. A.PrinceJ. R.McKeeG. B.CarterS. E.LeoneR. M.Gill-HoppleK.GilmoreA. K. (2021). Racial disparities in sexual assault characteristics and mental health care after sexual assault medical forensic exams. Journal of Women’s Health, 30(10), 1448–1456. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2020.8935
RichardsT. N.TillyerM. S.WrightE. M. (2019). When victims refuse and prosecutors decline: Examining exceptional clearance in sexual assault cases. Crime & Delinquency,65(4), 474–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128719828351
53.
RoseV.RandallS. (1982). The impact of investigator perceptions of victim legitimacy on the processing of rape/sexual assault cases. Symbolic Interaction, 5, 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1982.5.1.23
54.
SchullerR. A.WallA. (1998). The effects of defendant and complainant intoxication on mock jurors’ judgments of sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22(4), 555–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00177.x
55.
ShawJ.LeeH. (2019). Race and the criminal justice system response to sexual assault: A systematic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 64(1–2), 256–278. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12334
56.
SpearsJ.SpohnC. (1997). The effect of evidence factors and victim characteristics on prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Justice Quarterly, 14, 501–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829700093451
57.
SpohnC. (2020). Sexual assault case processing: The more things change, the more they stay the same. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 9(1), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v9i1.1454
58.
SpohnC.BeichnerD.Davis-FrenzelE. (2001). Prosecutorial justifications for sexual assault case rejection: Guarding the “gateway to justice.”Social Problems, 48, 206–235. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2001.48.2.206
59.
SpohnC.HolleranD. (2001). Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of chagrining decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and intimate partners. Justice Quarterly, 18, 651–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820100095051
60.
SpohnC.SpearsJ. (1996). The effect of offender and victim characteristics on sexual assault case processing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 13, 649–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418829600093141
61.
SpohnC.TellisK. (2012). The criminal justice system’s response to sexual violence. Violence Against Women, 18(2), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212440020
62.
SpohnC.TellisK. (2013). Policing and prosecuting sexual assault: Inside the criminal justice system. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
63.
SpohnC.WhiteC.TellisK. (2014). Unfounding sexual assault: Examining the decision to unfound and identifying false reports. Law & Society Review, 48, 161–192.
64.
TellisK. M.SpohnC. (2008). The sexual stratification hypothesis revisited: Testing assumptions about simple versus aggravate rape. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2008.04.006
65.
TemkenJ.KrahéB. (2008). Sexual assault and the justice gap: A question of attitude. Hart Publishing.
66.
ThompsonA.TappS. N. (2023a). Criminal victimization, 2022 (NCJ 307089). U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
67.
ThompsonA.TappS. N. (2023b). Just the stats: Violent victimization by race or Hispanic origin, 2008-2021 (NCJ 305262). U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
