Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/19286 Record ID: 5a05db7c-34b6-4723-b614-1725e3d8ad28
Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Finn, Mary A | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-30T23:45:19Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-30T23:45:19Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2004 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/19286 | - |
| dc.language | en | en |
| dc.publisher | US National Institute of Justice | en |
| dc.subject | Advocacy | en |
| dc.subject | Criminal justice responses | en |
| dc.subject | Policy | en |
| dc.title | The effects of victims’ experiences with prosecutors on victim empowerment and re-occurrence of intimate partner violence, final report | en |
| dc.type | Report | en |
| dc.identifier.catalogid | 3797 | en |
| dc.identifier.url | https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/202983.pdf | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | new_record | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | Report | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | International | en |
| dc.description.notes | This study identifies the types of actions taken by prosecutors in 2 court jurisdictions in the United States, one of which had a ‘no-drop’ policy, and their impact on the sense of empowerment of victims of intimate partner violence. Prosecutors’ actions are classified into 5 types depending on the degree to which they allowed victims to exercise choice or coerced them into participating in court processes. Data were collected from 170 adult female victims of family violence. Findings indicate that the existence of a ‘no-drop’ policy did not result in more coercive strategies. Coercive strategies, such as threatening victims with arrest or using subpoenas to obtain victim’s testimony, were as likely to happen regardless of whether there was a ‘no-drop’ policy or not. With the exception of victims’ ratings of the helpfulness of police, the factors which related to personal empowerment and court empowerment were different. Actions taken by prosecutors did not affect victims’ self efficacy or personal empowerment but did influence victims’ level of court empowerment. The greatest reduction in court empowerment was when victims had minimal contact with the prosecutors’ office or who were coerced into participating in the court process. Punishment severity is found not to be related to court empowerment. Victims with partners who were violent towards them during the period of arrest and initial disposition, and who continued to live together, were more likely to experience abuse. Results suggest that the use of coercive strategies had the impact of decreasing victims’ empowerment. | en |
| dc.date.entered | 2005-06-15 | en |
| Appears in Collections: | Reports | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 202983.pdf | 202983.pdf | 6.29 MB | Adobe PDF |  View/Open |
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.