A Uniquely Punitive Turn? Sex Offenders and the Persistence of Punitive Sanctioning

Abstract

Objectives:

This article tests two theoretical ideas: (1) that social concerns about particular “dangerous classes” of offenders shift over time to influence court sanctioning practices and (2) that, since the 1990s, sex offenders in particular came to be viewed by courts as one such “dangerous class.”

Methods:

We examine sanctioning trends in Florida and compare punishment of sex offenders in earlier versus later parts of the get-tough era. We then examine whether sentencing is associated with rational criminal justice incentives (e.g., increasing seriousness or rates of sex crimes) or with shifting public concerns (e.g., increasing media attention to sexual violence).

Results:

Punitiveness increased for all crimes but especially for sex crimes. Punitiveness appears not to be driven by increasing seriousness or rates of crime, but does appear to be partially driven by increasing national media attention to sexual violence.

Conclusions:

The findings support arguments that sex offenders were subjected to a uniquely punitive turn in sanctioning and that courts are sensitive to shifting public concerns. The results advance theoretical arguments developed by Gottschalk and earlier work that suggests that the persistence of get-tough era sentencing practices may be driven in part through focal attention to select types of offenders.