Expansion of Arrest Power: A Key to Effective Intervention
Lisa Lerman1982
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
AI
AI
The paper discusses the critical role of police in effectively intervening in domestic violence cases, emphasizing that proper police handling is essential for successful prosecution. It argues for more frequent arrests of abusers as a means to facilitate cooperation from victims, enhance the integrity of police reports, and assert the victim's right to safety. The text highlights that immediate arrest can prevent further violence and communicates to both parties the seriousness of the crime, while also recognizing the need for careful assessment by police officers to avoid exacerbating situations.
Related papers
Twenty Years of Mandatory Arrest: Police Decision Making in the Face of Legal Requirements
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2010
More than 20 years ago, state legislation began moving toward a mandatory arrest approach for police officers who handle domestic violence. It is expected that officers have shifted from an "underenforcement" orientation toward proenforcement. To examine this hypothesis, this study integrated elements of New York State domestic violence legislation into vignettes. Officers from one large department in New York State completed surveys with multiple vignettes. More than 80% of the officers were likely or very likely to arrest in all vignettes. Arrest was more likely when there was a visible injury, when there was an order of protection, and when the suspect was disrespectful. The victim's preference for no arrest is not significant in officers' decision making. Policy implications and directions for additional research are discussed.
Arrest: What's the Big Deal
William Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 1997
For the last twenty years, activists in the battered women's movement have been urging the criminal justice system to take action against domestic violence. They want the system to treat it like a crime, to recognize that its perpetrators are chronic, high-risk offenders, and to acknowledge that this violence is costly in both human and social terms. Arrest is one type of intervention that advocates for battered women have universally promoted as a fundamental underpinning of an effective response to violence targeted at women in intimate relationships. Yet, activists have not seen arrest as a panacea. They have not identified it as a unitary action, sufficient unto itself. Rather, activists have been calling for coordinated, comprehensive, and specialized intervention by all components of the legal and human services systems. Experience has demonstrated that arrest, when effected in a system designed to protect the victim and hold the perpetrator accountable, may interrupt patterns of violence; avert life-imperiling injuries, homicide and suicide; and prevent the most frequent and endangering of "copycat" crimes. On the other hand, activists assert that when arrest is a singular intervention, the transitory nature of the beneficial effects and the chance that offenders will seek retribution may place battered women and children at an escalated risk. Thus, when activists seek mandatory, preferred, or presumptive arrest policies and practice in domestic violence cases, it must be understood that the demand is for the employment of multiple, synchronized strategies by the legal system. The demand is based on a conviction that the death, dismemberment, destruction, and denigration of women are intolerable occurrences in society. Moreover, they are preventable. Effective intervention, arrest, or other actions, must be measured in light of explicit goals. In the context of domestic violence, there are six primary goals. The first and overarching goal is safety for battered women and children. Every intervention should be measured against the yardstick of safety.
Punitive Action or Gentle Persuasion: Exploring Police Officers' Justifications for Using Dual Arrest in Domestic Violence Cases
Violence Against Women, 2006
Mandatory and preferred arrest policies may be resulting in a backlash for victims who are arrested along with their batterers. Little prior research has explored why officers engage in dual arrests. The current study examines the rationales employed by officers to justify dual arrests in a preferred arrest jurisdiction. Content analysis of thought protocols of police officers (n = 24) who reported they would arrest both parties was undertaken. Officers justified arrest of both parties, citing that such was required by law and the desire to force both parties to obtain counseling for their relationship. Implications for policy development are examined.
Contributory factors affecting arrest in domestic and non‐domestic assaults
American Journal of Police, 1996
Traditionally, police officers have viewed domestic "disputes" as private, family matters. In the 1960s and 1970s, officers were trained not to arrest the perpetrators of domestic violence. Instead, officers were trained to defuse the situation. Some police agencies even developed domestic dispute teams that coupled police and social service workers to mediate these disputes (
Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence and Their Implications for Battered Women
Historically, the criminal justice system has failed to adequately respond to woman battering. In response to criticisms, the system has moved toward emphasizing pro-arrest policies. Much of this redirection resulted from outcry from feminist groups and the findings from the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment, which indicated that arrest deters offenders at higher rates than separation or mediation. Consequently, in the ensuing years, many police departments have restructured their policies and procedures; replication efforts have tested the deterrence hypothesis using different samples and geographic sites. Several particular concerns have been raised as a result of these shifts in policy: first, the replication studies have failed to demonstrate convincingly that arrest of batterers deters repeat offenses from occurring in sites other than Minneapolis; arrest may in fact make the situation worse. Second, under mandatory arrest statutes, often both the victim and offender are arrested despite pre-emptive aggression from the offender. Finally, pro-arrest policies may introduce disproportionately negative ramifications for women of lower socioeconomic classes and minority women. In this chapter, the changes I in how the criminal justice system responds to woman batterers, beginning with a review of the policy changes since the 1980s, are explored. Next, the research conducted to evaluate pro-arrest policies is addressed. The implications for victims are assessed in terms of these studies and the differential impact these policies may have for lower-class and minority women. Finally, a brief review of alternatives and supplements to arrest is conducted, such as coordinated community and criminal justice system response efforts.
THE PREVENTIVE EFFECTS OF ARREST ON INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE: RESEARCH, POLICY AND THEORY*
Criminology <html_ent glyph="@amp;" ascii="&"/> Public Policy, 2002
This research addresses the limitations of prior analyses and reviews of five experiments testing for the specific deterrent effect of arrest on intimate partner violence by applying to individual level data consistent eligibility criteria, common independent and outcome measures, and appropriate statistical tests. Based on 4,032 cases involving adult males who assaulted their female intimate partners, multivariate regression analyses show consistent but modest reductions in subsequent offenses targeting the original victim that is attributable to arresting the suspect. Although the reductions attributable to arrest are similar across all five studies, other factors, such as the suspect's prior arrest record, are stronger predictors of subsequent offenses. The effect of arrest is also modest compared with the general decline in offenses toward the same victim during the follow-up period.
The Specific Deterrent Effects of Arrest for Domestic Assault
American Sociological Review, 1984
The specific deterrence doctrine and labeling theory predict opposite effects of punishment on individual rates of deviance. The limited cross-sectional evidence available on the question is inconsistent, and experimental evidence has been lacking. The Police Foundation and the Minneapolis Police Department tested these hypotheses in a field experiment on domestic violence. Three police responses to simple assault were randomly assigned to legally eligible suspects: an arrest; "advice" (including, in some cases, informal mediation); and an order to the suspect to leave for eight hours. The behavior of the suspect was trackedfor six months after the police intervention, with both official data and victim reports. The official recidivism measures show that the arrested suspects manifested significantly less subsequent violence than those who were ordered to leave. The victim report data show that the arrested subjects manifested significantly less subsequent violence than those who were advised. The findings falsify a deviance amplification model of labeling theory beyond initial labeling, and fail to falsify the specific deterrence prediction for a group of offenders with a high percentage of prior histories of both domestic violence and other kinds of crime.
ARREST FOR DOMESTIC AND OTHER ASSAULTS*
Criminology, 2001
We wish to thank Steve Messner and Robin Shepard Engel for their comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.
Top Ten Things Advocates Need to Know: (5) What is the impact of mandatory arrest laws on intimate partner violence victims and offenders?
* Mandatory arrest refers to any state or local law or police policy which requires a police officer to make an arrest when responding to a domestic violence call if there is probable cause to believe any violence has occurred. * Mandatory arrest policies have been shown to only slightly lower repeat offending rates, in particular for individuals who are married and employed. * Arrest may actually increase the risk of retaliation by abusers with a prior history of violence, or among those who are unemployed and have little to lose. * Mandatory arrest policies may be disempowering for survivors by discouraging them from calling the police. This is particularly true for minority women already weary of the fairness of the criminal justice system. * Mandatory arrest policies has been shown to result in more women being arrested, often as cases of dual arrest where both offender and survivor are taken into custody. * No-drop prosecution policies usually mean that the state or city presses assault charges against the domestic violence offender rather than the victim. The survivor’s participation is not required. * Research finds that no-drop policies are costly, not immediately protective, and may even have the opposite effect as intended by discouraging women from reporting future violence.
Related papers
Controversies Surrounding Mandatory Arrest Policies and the Police Response to Intimate Partner Violence
Sociology Compass, 2008
Since the early 1970s, the efforts of the battered women's movement have led to many changes in the criminal justice response to intimate partner violence (often referred to more broadly as 'domestic violence') in the USA. One important reform has been the implementation of policies that encourage or mandate the arrest of offenders. However, mandatory arrest policies have been hotly debated by scholars, activists, and criminal justice system officials. In this article, I review the recent changes to the ways in which police officers respond to intimate partner violence and discuss the controversies surrounding these changes in light of recent research. I briefly consider why the literature on this topic has produced such contradictory findings and I discuss several actions that need to be taken in order to improve police response to intimate partner violence and better meet the needs of battered women.
The Effects of Arrest on Intimate Partner Violence: New Evidence From the Spouse Assault Replication Program
PsycEXTRA Dataset, 2000
Policing Domestic Violence: The Significance of Charging in the Post-Arrest Decision Making of Police Officers
During the 1980s many state legislatures enacted laws to address domestic violence cases, including mandatory arrest and warrantless arrest in a misdemeanor domestic violence incident. The domestic violence arrest decision has been extensively examined, but this is not the final decision point for officers. This research examined police officers' decisions when listing criminal charges in domestic violence incidents. Using a vignette research design, data come from 267 police officers in a large department. Most police officers listed the criminal charge that would be expected based on the conditions described in the vignette. Specific factors increased the likelihood of misdemeanor and felony level criminal charges being listed.
Police handling of domestic calls: The importance of offender's presence in the arrest decision
Journal of Criminal Justice, 1996
Though much has been written about the correlates associated with the police decision to arrest when responding to domestic incidents, the current literature is almost completely silent about the effect of offender's presence on disposition. Using police records from one large jurisdiction in South Florida, this research investigates differences between offenders who are present when police arrive and those who are absent in terms of offender, victim, and situational characteristics. Consistent with prior research, this study found that 48 percent of domestic violent offenders were absent when police arrived. Furthermore, offender's presence was found to be the most powerful predictor of an arrest outcome.
Gender differences in perceptions of arrest laws and factors associated with arrests in domestic violence incidents
Domestic violence severely impacts individuals and society as a whole. The purpose of this research study was to explore the gender differentiation observed in police officers' perceptions on mandatory arrest policies and domestic violence incidents, as well as to examine how those perceptions influence the decision to arrest in domestic violence cases. The first research question attempted to identify how officers are guided by arrest policies, specifically, mandatory arrest policies. Secondly, the researchers wanted to examine how officers perceive having to use mandatory arrest policies. Finally, the researchers sought to find out what other factors guide their decisions to make an arrest, as well as the difficulties that may arise during a domestic violence incident. A majority of officers believed that mandatory arrest policies are effective. While most officers believed that mandatory arrest polices were effective, many suggested that they might step outside of policy during certain situations. Factors such as weapon use, child involvement, substance use, injuries, and the scene of the crime were all found to be predictors of arrest in domestic violence situations. Challenges discussed by both male and female officers included difficulty in determining who the perpetrator was and overcoming language barriers in domestic violence incidents. Gender-based differences observed in responses among officers were minimal.
In Dubious Battle: The Politics of Mandatory Arrest and Dominant Aggressor Laws
Partner Abuse, 2011
A major component of in the effort to reduce domestic violence in our communities has been a vigorous criminal justice response, one that holds perpetrators accountable for their actions and helps victims feel safe. In light of research finding higher rates of arrest per calls made to police and a corresponding decline in domestic violence crimes, mandatory arrest and pro-arrest laws were initially welcomed by advocates. When, however, it was apparent that these same laws led to a large number of dual arrests, and a proportionately greater increase in arrests of women compared to men, advocates started calling for primary aggressor or dominant aggressor laws. These laws, adopted in several states, including California, direct police officers to consider context and abuse history so that victims are not wrongfully arrested. A review of the relevant literature is conducted, as well as an examination of two law enforcement training programs, suggesting that primary aggressor and domina...
Mandatory arrest: loosely coupled organisations, situational variables, and the arrest decision
International Journal of Police Science & Management, 2008
Police officer decision-making is thought to be a function of organisation size and situational variables. Large organisations are assumed to have gaps between administrators and street-level workers, allowing officers in large agencies to exercise discretion in their decision-making, whereas officers in small agencies are closely connected to, and more easily monitored by, administrators. Situational variables are the legal and extralegal aspects of an incident that might influence decision-making. Loose-coupling theory provides a framework to examine the impact of organisation size on officer decision-making. This study examined the arrest decisions of officers when handling domestic violence incidents. A factorial research design integrated four situational variables into vignettes describing a domestic violence incident. Police officers in four departments, one large and three small, indicated the likelihood of making an arrest based on cases described in the vignettes. 917 vignettes were analysed, with results showing that most officers would arrest the offender. Victim injury, an order of protection, a victim's preference for an arrest, and an uncooperative offender were significant in the arrest decision. Agency size, however, was not significant in the arrest decision. The impacts of the findings are discussed, as is the utility of loosecoupling theory.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.