Frohmann Prosecutorial Decisionmaking

Convictability and Discordant Locales

• Purpose of Study: Examining how prosecutors assess sexual assault cases based on convictability, and the influence of race, class, and gender on their decision-making processes.

• Key Terms:

  • Convictability: Assessment of the likelihood of obtaining a guilty verdict at trial.

  • Discordant Locales: Cultural clashes between different communities as highlighted by prosecutors in their assessments of cases.

• Types of Descriptions Used by Prosecutors:

  • Person Descriptions: Used to define moral character for plea bargains, determine responses, and assess credibility in rape accounts.

  • Place Descriptions: Help identify suspicion, motives, and the context of incidents.

  • Activity Descriptions: Infers moral character based on actions linked to specific incidents.

• Interplay of Place and Person Descriptions:

  • Prosecutors use descriptions of neighborhoods to categorize victims, defendants, and jurors, thus creating 'discordant locales'.

  • Stereotypical characteristics of neighborhoods influence the interpretations of victims’ actions by jurors, leading to potential case rejections.

• Implications of Using Convictability as a Standard:

  • Prosecutors fear that jurors from different societal backgrounds (discordant locales) will misinterpret the case facts, affecting the likelihood of guilty verdicts.

  • Concerns about reputation and consequences motivate prosecutors to focus heavily on convictability.

• Constructing the Discourse:

  • Examples showcase the strategic concerns of a Deputy District Attorney (DDA) regarding how juries will perceive victims, creating predictor models based on cultural understanding.

  • The dialogue captures complexities of individual circumstances, legal narratives, and prosecutorial strategies to enhance the case's prospects.

• Importance of Gender Norms in Sexual Assault Cases:

  • Gender plays a crucial role in shaping how cases are perceived and handled within the context of the legal system.

• Research Methodology:

  • Ethnographic study involving participant observations at a sexual assault prosecution unit, with notes on case processing events and interviews.

  • Data gathered from 40 case processings over eight months in a culturally diverse metropolitan area.

• Context of Decision-making:

  • Case filing determines which cases will proceed based on organizational policies and community political climates.

  • Prosecutors orient their decisions to anticipate juror perspectives based on previous experiences and societal norms regarding sexuality and violence.

• Cultural Segregation and Misinterpretation:

  • Segregation leads to distinct cultural interpretations of actions based on locality. Prosecutors posit that this affects how jurors interpret the victim’s narrative.

  • Example: A DDA’s concern about jurors categorizing a victim's actions as prostitution instead of as an outcome of socioeconomic struggles.

• Voicing Perspectives:

  • Prosecutors employ diverse perspectives to analyze and present cases, enhancing perceived credibility and authority in their narratives.

  • This strategy assists in bridging the cultural divides noted between communities.

• Conclusion—Discordant Locales as a Justification:

  • Prosecutors' categorizations of places and people reflect social inequalities rooted in race and class, leading to systemic biases.

  • The framework suggests re-evaluating prosecutorial policies to increase access to justice and equity within the legal system to counter biases.

• Socio-legal Significance:

  • Acknowledges the risk of excluding victims based on prevailing cultural judgments, reinforcing social disparities in access to legal recourse.

  • Advocates for organizational reforms to reframe convictability standards and broaden the scope of acceptable cases for prosecution, potentially redefining ‘convictable’ beyond conventional boundaries.

• Recommendations for Reform:

  • Propose policy changes allowing the pursuit of riskier but credible cases without penalizing prosecutors, leading to wider definitions of what constitutes a convictable case.

  • Encourage a more nuanced understanding of juror perceptions to help align prosecutorial decisions with justice for marginalized communities.