Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making

Originally published in the Alaska Justice Forum 23(1): 1, 4-8 (Spring 2006). This study examined the outcomes of sexual assault cases reported to the Anchorage Police Department between January 2000 and December 2003. The data include 1,052 cases involving one suspect and one victim (85% of all rep...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Snodgrass, G. Matthew
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center 2009
Subjects:
AK
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7011
id ftunivalaska:oai:scholarworks.alaska.edu:11122/7011
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivalaska:oai:scholarworks.alaska.edu:11122/7011 2023-05-15T18:48:38+02:00 Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making Snodgrass, G. Matthew 2009-03 http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7011 en_US eng University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center Snodgrass, G. Matthew. (2009). "Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making." Alaska Justice Forum Reprints 6 (Mar 2009). http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7011 Alaska Justice Forum Reprints Alaska Department of Law Anchorage AK Anchorage Police Department crime in Alaska criminal case processing prosecution sexual assault violence against women Article 2009 ftunivalaska 2023-02-23T21:36:46Z Originally published in the Alaska Justice Forum 23(1): 1, 4-8 (Spring 2006). This study examined the outcomes of sexual assault cases reported to the Anchorage Police Department between January 2000 and December 2003. The data include 1,052 cases involving one suspect and one victim (85% of all reported sexual assaults). Cases and charges were tracked through the Alaska Department of Law to determine what was referred, accepted, and convicted. * Overall, 18% of cases were referred for prosecution. The most common referred charge was a sexual assault in the first degree. Seventy-nine percent of referred charges were sexual assault charges. * Overall, 12% of cases were accepted for prosecution. The greatest point of attrition was from report to referral. Once referred, 68% of cases were accepted for prosecution. Sixty-eight percent of charges were accepted by the Department of Law as referred. The most common reasons for not accepting a charge as referred were evidentiary reasons. The most common accepted charge was also a sexual assault in the first degree. Seventy-five percent of accepted charges were sexual assault charges. * Overall, 11% of cases resulted in a conviction. Once accepted, 87% of cases resulted in a conviction. Although convictions were common in accepted cases, accepted charges were often dismissed. While 87% of accepted cases resulted in a conviction, 59% of accepted charges were dismissed. Ninety percent of guilty findings were a result of plea bargaining. With plea bargaining, some charges were dismissed but a conviction was still secured. Fifty-six percent of convicted charges were sexual assault charges. The most common convicted charge was for assault, followed by sexual assault in the second degree. Article in Journal/Newspaper Alaska Alaska Justice Forum University of Alaska: ScholarWorks@UA Anchorage
institution Open Polar
collection University of Alaska: ScholarWorks@UA
op_collection_id ftunivalaska
language English
topic Alaska Department of Law
Anchorage
AK
Anchorage Police Department
crime in Alaska
criminal case processing
prosecution
sexual assault
violence against women
spellingShingle Alaska Department of Law
Anchorage
AK
Anchorage Police Department
crime in Alaska
criminal case processing
prosecution
sexual assault
violence against women
Snodgrass, G. Matthew
Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
topic_facet Alaska Department of Law
Anchorage
AK
Anchorage Police Department
crime in Alaska
criminal case processing
prosecution
sexual assault
violence against women
description Originally published in the Alaska Justice Forum 23(1): 1, 4-8 (Spring 2006). This study examined the outcomes of sexual assault cases reported to the Anchorage Police Department between January 2000 and December 2003. The data include 1,052 cases involving one suspect and one victim (85% of all reported sexual assaults). Cases and charges were tracked through the Alaska Department of Law to determine what was referred, accepted, and convicted. * Overall, 18% of cases were referred for prosecution. The most common referred charge was a sexual assault in the first degree. Seventy-nine percent of referred charges were sexual assault charges. * Overall, 12% of cases were accepted for prosecution. The greatest point of attrition was from report to referral. Once referred, 68% of cases were accepted for prosecution. Sixty-eight percent of charges were accepted by the Department of Law as referred. The most common reasons for not accepting a charge as referred were evidentiary reasons. The most common accepted charge was also a sexual assault in the first degree. Seventy-five percent of accepted charges were sexual assault charges. * Overall, 11% of cases resulted in a conviction. Once accepted, 87% of cases resulted in a conviction. Although convictions were common in accepted cases, accepted charges were often dismissed. While 87% of accepted cases resulted in a conviction, 59% of accepted charges were dismissed. Ninety percent of guilty findings were a result of plea bargaining. With plea bargaining, some charges were dismissed but a conviction was still secured. Fifty-six percent of convicted charges were sexual assault charges. The most common convicted charge was for assault, followed by sexual assault in the second degree.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Snodgrass, G. Matthew
author_facet Snodgrass, G. Matthew
author_sort Snodgrass, G. Matthew
title Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
title_short Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
title_full Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
title_fullStr Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
title_full_unstemmed Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making
title_sort sexual assault case processing: a descriptive model of attrition and decision making
publisher University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center
publishDate 2009
url http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7011
geographic Anchorage
geographic_facet Anchorage
genre Alaska
Alaska Justice Forum
genre_facet Alaska
Alaska Justice Forum
op_source Alaska Justice Forum Reprints
op_relation Snodgrass, G. Matthew. (2009). "Sexual Assault Case Processing: A Descriptive Model of Attrition and Decision Making." Alaska Justice Forum Reprints 6 (Mar 2009).
http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7011
_version_ 1766241825038794752