669164

research-article2016
JIVXXX10.1177/0886260516669164Journal of Interpersonal ViolenceMorabito et al.

Article
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
120
It All Just Piles Up: The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
Challenges to Victim sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0886260516669164
Credibility Accumulate jiv.sagepub.com

to Influence Sexual
Assault Case Processing

Melissa Schaefer Morabito,1 April Pattavina,1,2

and Linda M. Williams2

Abstract
The underreporting of sexual assault is well known to researchers,
practitioners, and victims. When victims do report, their complaints are
unlikely to end in arrest or prosecution. Existing research on police discretion
suggests that the police decision to arrest for sexual assault offenses can be
influenced by a variety of legal and extra-legal factors particularly challenges
to victim credibility. Although extant literature examines the effects of
individual behaviors on police outcomes, less is known about how the
accumulation of these behaviors, attributions, and characteristics affects
police decision making. Using data collected from the Los Angeles Police
Department and Sheriffs Department, we examine one police decision
pointthe arrest to fill this gap in the literature. First, we examine the
extent to which the effects of potential challenges to victim credibility,
based on victim characteristics and behaviors, influence the arrest decision,
and next, how these predictors vary across circumstances. Specifically, we
examine how factors that challenge victim credibility affect the likelihood of

1University of Massachusetts Lowell, USA

2Wellesley Centers for Women, MA, USA

Corresponding Author:
Melissa Schaefer Morabito, University of Massachusetts Lowell, 113 Wilder Street, Lowell,
MA, USA.
Email: melissa_morabito@uml.edu
2 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

arrest in sexual assault cases where the victim and offender are strangers,
acquaintances, and intimate partners.

Keywords
sexual assault, mental health and violence, alcohol and drugs

It is well known that low rates of arrest and prosecution following reports of
sexual assault do little to encourage victims to make formal report of the
crime (Campbell, Wasco, Ahrens, Self, & Barnes, 2001; Rennison, 2002).
For victims who report to the police, their cases rarely result in arrest and
conviction. In fact, evidence suggests that there is substantial attrition in sex-
ual assault cases (Spohn & Tellis, 2012). Research conducted with police
agencies across the United States documents that between 55% and 88% of
cases reported to the police will not result in an arrest (Alderden & Ullman,
2012; Bouffard, 2000; Spohn & Tellis, 2012). Once cases reach the prosecu-
tor, 18% to 61% of the cases are not prosecuted (Alderden & Ullman, 2012;
Spohn & Tellis, 2012).
Previous research suggests that this attrition occurs at every stage of the
criminal justice system (Alderden & Ullman, 2012; LaFree, 1981; Spohn &
Tellis, 2012), but much of the literature has focused on the prosecutorial
charging decisions (cf. Alderden & Ullman, 2012; Spohn & Holleran, 2001;
Tasca, Rodriguez, Spohn, & Koss, 2013). There is good reason for this
approach because the discretion inherent in the prosecutor role makes him or
her an extremely powerful decision maker (Davis, 1975). Prosecutors can
decide whether or not to pursue a case criminally, whether to accept a plea
bargain and reduce charges or to push for a trial. Yet, the importance of the
police role in decision making cannot be overstated. Police are considered to
be the gatekeepers of the criminal justice system in that they can restrict the
flow of complaints to the rest of the system. Most importantly, police can
decide whether to make an arrest when the suspect is known. As noted above,
the majority of sexual assault cases reported to the police will never result in
an arrest (Alderden & Ullman, 2012; Bouffard, 2000; Spohn & Tellis, 2012).
Research on police discretion suggests that the police decision to arrest in
cases of reported sexual assault can be influenced by a variety of legal and
extra-legal factors (Alderden & Ullman, 2012; Spohn & Tellis, 2012; Tasca
etal., 2013). Legal factors are those that provide evidence (i.e., witnesses or
physical evidence) of elements of a crime as defined by statute. Extra-legal
factors are those thought to be legally irrelevant to the definition of the crime.
These include victim, suspect, or other characteristics associated with an
Morabito et al. 3

incident such as the relationship between the victim and the offender. In par-
ticular, research suggests that extra-legal factors, namely, the characteristics
of the victim and her behavior prior to or following the alleged rape, can
influence the outcome of sexual assault cases (cf. Du Mont, Miller, & Myhr,
2003; LaFree, 1989). For example, women who have engaged in what has
been termed by some as high risk behaviors such as hitchhiking, drinking
alcohol, or using drugs may not be viewed as genuine victims (Du Mont
etal., 2003).
Spohn and Tellis (2012) suggest that perhaps the relationship between
extra-legal factors and decision making is uncovered when more sophisti-
cated methodologies are usedcase characteristics can differentially affect
criminal justice decision making across circumstances. For example, in pros-
ecutorial decision making, personal characteristics of the victim influenced
charging decisions only in cases involving acquaintances and intimate part-
ners but not those involving perpetrators who were strangers (Spohn &
Holleran, 2001). This same nuanced decision making, has not, however, been
explored with a focus on the police.
Extant police literature does examine the individual effects of different
victim behaviors and case characteristics (cf. Du Mont etal., 2003; LaFree,
1989; Spohn & Tellis, 2012) on police outcomes. Yet, we do not know
whether and how the accumulation or piling up of these behaviors, attribu-
tions, and characteristics affects police decision makingspecifically across
circumstances such as when there are differing victim and offender relation-
ships. In an effort to better understand the nuances in the police decision to
arrest in sexual assault cases, we explore effect of these challenges to victim
credibility or risk taking behaviors. Using data collected from the Los
Angeles Police Department and Sheriffs Department (Spohn & Tellis, 2012),
we examine one police decision pointthe arrest. First, we determine the
extent to which the effects of potential challenges to victim credibility, based
on victim characteristics and behaviors, influence the arrest decision, and
next, how these predictors vary across circumstances. Specifically, we exam-
ine how factors that challenge victim credibility affect the likelihood of arrest
in sexual assault cases where the victim and offender are strangers, acquain-
tances, and intimate partners.

Review of the Literature and Theoretical

Foundations
Once a sexual assault is officially reported, police have a very high level of
discretion about how to proceed. First, the police must decide whether the
4 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

report is founded, meaning the police must determine whether they believe
the incident actually occurred. Misuse of the power to unfound remains a
serious issue in disposing of sexual assault cases (Police Executive Research,
Forum, 2012). Officers have unfounded complaints erroneously when they
cannot substantiate evidence of physical trauma or because they believe that
prosecutors would decline to pursue the case (Police Executive Research,
Forum, 2012). Neither of these is actually a legitimate reason for unfounding
a sexual assault claim. Irrespective of the evidence, police are more likely to
unfound cases where there were questions regarding the victims moral char-
acter or credibility (McCahill, Meyer, Fischman, 1979) and a perception of
victim unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation (LaFree, 1989).
More pertinent to the current investigation, once a case is founded, it can
be open and inactive or it can be cleared. Cases that are open and inactive
may lack the evidence necessary to identify a suspect. Police may choose to
leave the case open in hopes that new evidence will emerge. The other out-
come is clearance, and there are two clearance categories that can be used by
the police. These categories are cleared by arrest and cleared by exceptional
means. According to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Handbook (2004),
a case may be exceptionally cleared if the following criteria are met: (a) The
police have definitely established the identity of the offender; (b) there is
enough information to support an arrest, charge, and turning over to the court
for prosecution; (c) the exact location of the offender is known so that the
subject can be taken into custody; and (d) there is some reason outside law
enforcement control that precludes arresting, charging, and prosecuting the
offender (Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2004).
The use of the exceptional clearance category to close a case was origi-
nally intended for those rare cases where an offender is known and probable
cause exists for arrest, but due to circumstances, beyond the control of law
enforcement, no arrest is made (Feeney, 2000). This could be, for example,
when the offender has died or is already imprisoned for another offense.
According to Spohn and Tellis (2012), 45.7% of sexual assault incidents
reported to the police in Los Angeles were officially classified as cleared or
solved by the police. Many of these incidents (33.5% of all cases), however,
did not result in an arrest, but instead were cleared using a UCR exceptional
means classification. So although a suspect was known to the police, no
arrest was ever made and the case was closed. Broadening the Spohn and
Tellis research, Pattavina, Morabito, and Williams (2016) found that in an
analysis of National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) cases, 45%
resulted in clearance by exceptional means and that agency, legal, and extra-
legal factors predicted the use of exceptional clearance relative to arrest.
Morabito et al. 5

The Decision-Making Process

Researchers and practitioners have sought to understand how these decisions
are made by the police in cases of reported sexual assault (Kerstetter, 1990;
Spohn & Tellis, 2012). Evidence suggests that legal and extra-legal factors
can define this decision-making process. Kerstetter (1990) found that legal
factors, such as whether physical evidence was gathered, the use of a weapon,
injury, whether a suspect was in custody, and the presence of witnesses pre-
dicted the founding of a crime. Case factors indicating strength of the evi-
dence such as the number of witnesses and the collection of physical evidence
have been found to be significant predictors of arrest in non-stranger cases,
but not for cases involving intimate partners (Spohn & Tellis, 2011).
One interpretation of the influence of physical evidence on outcomes is
that victims who receive medical exams have a strengthened complaint
because there is an increased likelihood of documented evidence of the
assault. However, the completion of a medical exam may also imply that
victims have engaged in the behaviors they are supposed to after they
have been assaulted and that they reported in time for such evidence to be
collected. The literature suggests that the availability of this type of evi-
dence and the behavior of the victim immediately after the assault can
affect criminal justice outcomes (Nugent-Borakove etal., 2006; Spohn,
White, & Tellis, 2014). Finally, whether the complaint was investigated by
a specialized sexual violence unit should also be considered. This may cap-
ture investigative resources specifically allocated to handle sexual violence
cases, which may result in more complete investigations and evidence gath-
ering. There has been scant investigation into how special units affect case
outcomes in sexual assault cases and the evidence of their effectiveness is
lacking. For example, LaFree (1989) found that although there were
improved attitudes toward rape and rape victims in a specialized sexual
assault unit, there were virtually no differences in arrest rates. Similarly, in
their examination of prosecutors offices, Beichner and Spohn (2005) found
virtually no difference in case outcomes between an office with a special-
ized sexual assault unit and one without. Although this does not apply spe-
cifically to police agencies, it does call into question the efficacy of the
specialized unit in responding to sexual assault.
Extra-legal factors also have been found to be important in assessment of
victim credibility and ultimately in the arrest decision. Myths about rape and
rape victims are still prevalent (Suarez & Gadalla, 2010). Victim behaviors
may contribute to this assessment particularly if the victim believes that the
complaint will not be taken seriously by the police. If, as a result of fears of the
police response, the victim ceases to cooperate with the police investigation,
6 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

then her credibility may be doubted by the police. This may become a vicious
circle of police doubts that then trigger victim reluctance to cooperate, which
in turn lead to more doubts about credibility. Herman (2003) notes that victims
might be willing to participate in formal legal proceedings if they believed that
the system offered remedies that could potentially make the ordeal worth-
while. Some evidence suggests that victims only participate in the sexual
assault investigations when they believe that the complaint is being taken seri-
ously by police and prosecutors (Spohn & Tellis, 2012). Thus, the relationship
between victim cooperation and case characteristics that affect case outcome
is quite complicated. Regardless of the reason for not cooperating, prior
research suggests that when victims are viewed as uncooperative or in a
straightforward manner withdraw their cooperation, the sexual assault com-
plaint is less likely to end in arrest (Bouffard, 2000; LaFree, 1981).
The relationship between the victim and the offender is also an important
extra-legal predictor of the likelihood of arrest. Spohn and Tellis (2012) note
that police and prosecutors are more likely to devote resources to cases
involving strangers than those where the assault was perpetrated by an inti-
mate partner. This finding supports earlier work conducted by McCahill and
colleagues (1979) that found sexual assaults by strangers were more likely to
be taken seriously by the police. The best evidence suggests that the predic-
tors of case outcomes differ based on the relationship between the victim and
the offender (Mccahill etal., 1979; Spohn & Holleran, 2001). While this lit-
erature informs the field about the allocation of resources, scant research
exists exploring the variations in outcomes for cases involving different rela-
tionships between the victim and offender.
Victim race has been identified as an important predictor of sexual assault
case outcomes but is inconsistent across studies (LaFree, 1989; McCahill
etal., 1979; Tellis & Spohn, 2008). Victim race seems to be an important
predictor when the relationship between the victim and the offender (Spohn
& Holleran, 2001) and the credibility of the victim (Spears & Spohn, 1997)
are taken into account (Spohn & Tellis, 2012). Yet overall, the findings are
mixed regarding the influence of race on case outcomes (LaFree, 1989;
Spohn & Tellis, 2008).
Victim credibility represents another extra-legal influence on police deci-
sion making separate from considerations of the interactions between credi-
bility and cooperation with the police. There exists a large body of literature
examining victim credibility in sexual assault cases (cf. Jordan, 2004;
McCahill etal., 1979; Spohn etal., 2014). Poor victim character is indi-
cated by engaging in what is viewed by the police as risky behaviors (Jordan,
2004), having behavioral health challenges (Spohn etal., 2014), or general
misbehavior. A lack of credibility means that some women may not be
Morabito et al. 7

viewed as genuine victims of sexual assault (Du Mont etal., 2003) because
they are considered to be responsible for their own victimization. These
threats to victim credibilitynamely, engaging in what is viewed as risky
behavior and experiencing behavioral health challengesmay reduce the
likelihood that sexual assault cases end in arrest. In short, women who do not
act like what is deemed to be the expected behavior of real victims may
have difficulty fully engaging criminal justice services.
Risky behaviors have been variously described as those behaviors that
are unfeminine or involve the victim being on some levels complicit with
the perpetrator or even breaking the law. Hitchhiking, engaging in sexual
activity with strangers, or walking alone at night are all viewed as threats to
victim credibility (Myers & LaFree, 1982; Spears & Spohn, 1997. Generally,
engaging in these activities may brand a victim as less credible or lead to her
being viewed in an unsympathetic manner (Kerstetter & Van Winkle, 1990).
Behavioral health challenges involve substance abuse and mental illness.
Women who were drinking or using drugs at the time of the rape or who are
known addicts may be considered to be unsympathetic (Kilpatrick, Resnick,
Ruggiero, Conoscenti, & McCauley, 2007; Schuller & Stewart, 2000).
Women with serious mental illnesses who are sexually assaulted also may
experience difficulty establishing credibility as victims (Tasca etal., 2013).
Some of the difficulty for those with mental health problems may be a reflec-
tion of the manifestation of symptoms. For example, Goodman, Rosenberg,
Mueser, and Drake (1997) note that for people with serious mental illnesses,
accurate recall of events may be complicated by delusions or hallucinations,
side-effects from medication, or the co-occurrence of a substance abuse dis-
order. All of these factors can affect memory and can potentially contribute to
police doubts about the victims credibility. Compounding the impact of
behavioral health challenges is the association of these issues with an
increased likelihood of experiencing homelessness, substance abuse, and
engaging in risky sexual behavior (Goodman etal., 1997)meaning that
with addiction or mental illnesses come other risk factors that can also nega-
tively affect believability. Indeed, some victims of sexual assault who are
dealing with multiple pre-existing behavioral health issues may also have
engaged in risky activitiesthus presenting many of the characteristics
that have traditionally been viewed as threats to victim credibility.
Researchers have identified the importance of studying the relationship
between these behaviors and police decision making. Some of these threats
to victim credibility have been examined individually with respect to
police decision making (cf. Kerstetter, 1990; Tasca etal., 2013). Yet, none
of the literature includes a discussion of how many threats are too many.
Specifically, research does not exist that explores whether there is a
8 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

cumulative effect to these threats to victim credibility. For example, a

police officer may be sympathetic to a victim with a mental illness, but we
do not know whether that sympathy wanes if she is also addicted to drugs
and is homeless. Little is known about combinations of behaviors and
challenges that are correlated with victimization (cf. Hiday, Swartz,
Swanson, Borum, & Wagner, 1999).

The Nexus Between Risky Behaviors and VictimOffender

Relationship
There appears to be an intersection between the victimoffender relation-
ship and the engaging in seemingly risky behavior by the victim. For
example, women who were at a bar with their assailants prior to the
assault may be seen as culpable because they willingly spent time with the
suspect acting in a way that is seen as complicit with the offender (Spears
& Spohn 1997). Spohn and Tellis (2011) find some evidence to suggest
that police look for different levels of evidence depending on the relation-
ship between the victim and attacker. In instances where the victim and
offender were acquaintances, the police decisions are often largely predi-
cated on whether or not there was discrediting information on the victim
and evidence of victim resistance (Spohn & Tellis, 2011). This suggests
that police expect higher levels of proof and more genuine or expected
victim behavior to make an arrest when the victim and offender have a
relationship that proceeds the assault.
When victims do choose to report, often their expectations of poor
treatment are met. Recent research suggests that less than half of all
reports of sexual assault result in an arrest (Spohn & Tellis, 2012). The
police acting as gatekeepers to the criminal justice system make the deci-
sion about which crimes will move through to the next level. Our review
of the literature suggests a relationship between engaging in risky behav-
iors and the attrition of sexual assault cases as well as a correlation
between victimoffender relationship and case outcome. Yet, little is
known about how relationships and behaviors overlap to be predictive of
police decision making. The proposed model based on this literature
includes measures of legal and extra-legal factors first as predictors of the
likelihood of arrest. Specifically, we will focus on the measures of victim
credibility. Next, a more nuanced approach is taken to understand the
circumstances in which the predictive value of these measures of victim
credibility might vary, and we examine changes in predictive value across
victimoffender relationship types.
Morabito et al. 9

Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1: Victim engagement in behaviors seen as risky predicts the
likelihood of arrest in sexual assault cases.
Hypothesis 2: The effects of victim engagement in risky behavior on the
arrest decision in sexual assault cases are affected by the relationship
between the victim and the offender.

Data and Method

Data
For this analysis, we consider legal and extra-legal factors identified in prior
literature to be influencing the police decision to arrest. The data for the study
are from a stratified sample of reported incidents of rape occurring in Los
Angeles in 2008. All cases from 2008 were collected from the Los Angeles
Sheriffs Department, and a stratified random sample of cases was collected
from Los Angeles Police Department. Our analysis was conducted on 650
cases of reported sexual assaults committed by intimate partners, acquain-
tances, and strangers. The cases are limited to all sex crimes involving female
victims over the age of 12 that were reported in 2008.

Variable Selection
The dependent variable is whether or not the police made an arrest. It is coded
as a binary variable: arrest or no arrest. Thirty-seven percent of the cases
ended in an arrest. There is ample literature showing that both legal and
extra-legal factors play a role in the decision to arrest. In this study, we are
interested in examining how much the factors that potentially undermine the
police assessment of the credibility of the victim contribute to the likelihood
of arrest, especially in cases where the evidence is considered to be strong
and the victim is cooperative. We know from prior literature that these are
often the strongest predictors of arrest. Table 1 includes the variables we
selected along with descriptive statistics.
Independent variables considered in our analysis include legal factors that
provide the strongest legal evidence of the crime. Although such evidence is not
required by law, these measures include whether there was any physical evi-
dence gathered, whether there were injuries noted in the police report, whether
or not there was a weapon (including a gun, knife, or other weapons) used, and
whether witnesses were present.1 Whether or not a case was handled by a special
victims unit (SVU) is also included. These are both coded as binary variables.
10 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Table 1. Descriptives (n = 605).

Frequencies (%) Arrest (%)a

Dependent variable
Police Arrest No 63
Yes 37
Independent variables
Legal Factors
Physical Evidence No 49 28
Yes 51 45
Injury No 51 28
Yes 49 47
Weapon No 87 35
Yes 13 51
Witnesses No 59 30
Yes 41 47
SVU case No 90 37
Yes 10 33
Extra-legal factors
Victim Cooperative No 34 15
Yes 66 48
Credibility Questioned No 88 39
Yes 11 19
Relationship Stranger 29 23
Acquaintance 42 37
Intimate Partner 29 50
MH Issues No 90 38
Yes 10 24
Risk Taking No 74 37
Yes 26 37
Alcohol/Drug Use No 67 40
Yes 32 31
Victim Race Non-White 75 38
White 25 33
M
V (Victim Age [M = 26]) 26

Note. Missing data ranged from 0% to 2.6%. SVU= special victims unit; MH= mental health.
aChi-square significance italicized. T test for age not significant.

Extra-legal factors are victim characteristics or incident details that may

influence police outcomes. These factors represent considerations beyond
Morabito et al. 11

evidentiary standards that come into play when the police make the decision
to arrest (or not). As mentioned in the literature review, these characteristics
may negatively influence the police perception of the credibility of the victim
or likelihood of prosecution of the case. Measures include incident circum-
stances such as whether or not the victim engaged in risky behavior that
may have increased her exposure to a perpetrator, including accepting a ride
from a stranger or willingly going to a private residence (either victims or
suspects) with the alleged suspect. We also consider whether the victim was
reported to have been using alcohol or drugs and whether the police report
indicated that the victim had mental health (MH) issues. Each of these is
coded as a binary variable. The relationship between the victim and the main
suspect (stranger, acquaintance, or intimate partner) is also included as well
as victim age (a continuous variable) and the victims race (White or non-
White).2 Finally, we include a variable that indicates whether or not the vic-
tim was cooperative during the investigation. This is also coded as a binary
variable.
Table 1 also includes for the value of each independent variable the per-
centage of cases that ended in an arrest. Several variables considered in the
analysis did not reveal a significant relationship with arrest and were excluded
from subsequent analysis. The one exception was victim race. Given the
extensive consideration in the sexual assault attrition literature and the incon-
sistent effect of race in studies on police outcomes, we chose to retain it in the
multivariate models.

Results
Table 2 presents logistic regression results predicting an arrest outcome.
Model 1 includes only legal or evidentiary independent variables.3 This
model does not control for the extra-legal factor. Whether or not the victim
suffered an injury was a significant predictor and increased the odds of arrest
by a factor of 1.91. Weapon use also more than doubled (2.12) the odds of
arrest. Incidents involving witnesses were significantly more likely to end in
an arrest. The strongest predictor was whether the victim cooperated during
the investigation. The odds of arrest increased by a factor of five for those
incidents where the victim cooperated during the investigation.
The extra-legal factors were added to the legal factors in Model 2. This
means that the legal and extra-legal factors are both controlled for in the
model. The model fit improves significantly with the addition of these vari-
ables. The coefficients associated with the legal factors changed little in size
and significance in comparison with the first model. In this model, the evi-
dence variable is a significant predictor of arrest. Interestingly, questioning of
12 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Table 2. Logistic Regression Results Predicting Arrest Outcome.

Model 1. Legal/Evidentiary Model 2. Legal/Evidentiary

Predictors and Extra-Legal Factors

Odds 95% Confidence Odds 95% Confidence

Ratio Interval Ratio Interval
Legal factors
Evidence 1.42 [0.96, 2.09] 1.74 * [1.13, 2.68]
Victim injury 1.91 ** [1.30, 2.82] 1.69 ** [1.11, 2.57]
Weapon 2.14 ** [1.25, 3.65] 2.69 ** [1.50, 4.82]
Witnesses 1.67 * [1.15, 2.41] 2.08 ** [1.39, 3.12]
Victim cooperative 5.18 ** [3.31, 8.09] 5.19 ** [3.24, 8.30]
Extra-legal factors
Credibility 0.53 [0.25, 1.10]
questions
Intimate partner 3.96 ** [2.32, 6.76]
Acquaintance 2.10 ** [1.28, 3.45]
Mental health 0.47 * [0.23, 0.98]
issues
Alcohol/drug use 0.58 * [0.37, 0.92]
Victim White 1.02 [0.64, 1.63]
Constant 0.08 ** [0.05, 0.13] 0.04 ** [0.02, 0.08]

*p < .05. **p < .01.

victim credibility by the investigating police officer was not a significant

predictor of arrest when other factors are controlled. More specific measures
that have been closely tied to victim credibility did, however, emerge as sig-
nificant predictors of arrest. For example, incidents where police describe
victims as having mental health issues have reduced odds of an arrest by a
factor of .47. Similarly, incidents where the victim was reported to have been
using drugs or alcohol are less likely to end in an arrest when other factors are
controlled. Cases involving intimate partners and acquaintances have signifi-
cantly higher odds of ending in arrest than incidents involving strangers.
Victim race was not found to be significant. We also considered the possibil-
ity of interaction between race and mental illness and substance use (not
shown), and the results were not significant.4
We are particularly interested in determining how factors that may influence
victim credibility contribute in a cumulative way to the arrest decision that goes
beyond legal factors. Given that two factors associated with victim credibility,
mental health, and substance use, presented as significant predictors of arrest,
Morabito et al. 13

Table 3. Predicted Probabilities of Arrest for Incidents Involving Victims With and
Without Mental Health Challenges and Substance Use.
Probability Probability
Incidents With All Significant Legal/ of Arrest Probability of Arrest
Evidentiary Factors Present for Incidents of Arrest for
Involving for Incidents Incidents
Victim Has Mental Victim Using Intimate Involving Involving
Health Issues Drugs or Alcohol Partners Acquaintances Strangers
No No 0.92 0.87 0.75
No Yes 0.83 0.74 0.56
Yes No 0.86 0.79 0.62
Yes Yes 0.73 0.62 0.42

we investigate further how these factors contribute to the police decision to

arrest, taking the specific strength of evidence into account. Table 3 presents
the predicted probabilities of arrest in cases where the evidence is strongest and
hence most likely to meet probable cause necessary for arrest, that is, for inci-
dents where there is physical evidence, injury, weapon use, and witnesses, and
the victim is cooperative, with the additive impact of mental health and sub-
stance use calculated separately, and then together.5 Essentially, we hold the
legal factors and victim cooperation at a value of one (which indicates cases
with strong evidence and victim cooperation), and vary the presence of mental
health and substance use variables from zero to one (or no to yes) and estimate
the additional presence of each to the probability of arrest. The results are fur-
ther sorted by victimsuspect relationship.
As expected, the probability of arrest for incidents involving intimate part-
ners where the evidence is strong, the victim cooperates, and there is no indi-
cation of mental health or substance use issues, is very high at .92. If the
victim was using drugs or alcohol, the probability drops to .83. If the victim
has mental health issues, the probability drops to .86. If the victim has both
mental health issues and was using drugs or alcohol, the probability of arrest
drops to .73. For acquaintances, the results show that for incidents where
there is strong evidence and a cooperative victim, the probability of arrest is
.87. It drops to .74 if the case is otherwise strong but the victim was using
drugs or alcohol, and to .79 if the victim had mental health challenges, and
finally to .62 if both are present. For strangers, the results show that for inci-
dents where there is strong evidence and a cooperative victim, the probability
of arrest is .75. It drops to .56 if the case is otherwise strong but the victim
was using drugs or alcohol, and to .62 if the victim had mental health chal-
lenges, and finally to .42 if both are present.
14 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Discussion and Conclusion

Our findings suggest that there exists a cumulative or piling on effect of
risk-taking behaviors and behavioral health challenges. This effect, however,
is affected by the relationship between the victim and the offender. As prior
research indicated, we found that the more challenges that are faced by a
victim (as noted in the case file), the less likely the police will make an arrest.
This is true when the victim and offender are intimate partners but even more
so when they are acquaintances or strangers. This represents a challenge as
acquaintance or date rapes are already challenges for police and prosecutors.
When investigating acquaintance and stranger rapes, police must identify a
suspect and find evidence to indicate an assault (Tasca etal., 2013). This can
be resource-intensive workmade more difficult without a cooperative vic-
tim. These findings do support the work of Bouffard (2000) who found that
arrest was more likely if the victim and suspect had a prior relationship.
Across all relationship types, the presence of behavioral health challenges
reduces the likelihood of arrest. These findings have huge consequences for
people with behavioral health challenges. Given that victims of sexual assault
often face myriad problemsparticularly those with behavioral health chal-
lenges (Teplin, McClelland, Abram, & Weiner, 2005), this presents a unique
challenge for case attrition. The literature suggests that women with mental
illness and who are chemically addicted are more likely to be sexually
assaulted than their peers without these behavioral health challenges
(Goodman etal., 1997; Maniglio, 2009; Teplin etal., 2005; Wekerle & Hall,
2002). And now, we find that these same victims are less likely to see their
complaints end in an arrest of the accused. This finding is concerning because
prior research suggests that between 21% and 76% of women with serious
mental illnesses experience sexual abuse in adulthood (Goodman etal.,
1997). In other crimes as well, police are less likely to make an arrest when
the victim has a behavioral health challenge (Tasca etal., 2013).
There are natural and unfortunate consequences that result from these out-
comes. First, victims experiencing these challenges may decide to not even
report sexual victimization to the police because they fear being discredited
and mistreated by the criminal justice system (Herman, 2003). And, when
they do report, we can expect few arrestsa troubling outcome that may
contribute to further victimization of these individuals, additional behavioral
health problems, and victimization of others at the hands of perpetrators who
are never brought to justice. Comparatively, there has been quite a bit of con-
cern regarding the drop in arrests for another personal crimehomicide to
60% (Riedel & Boulahanis, 2007)a rate still much higher than that of sex-
ual assault. Despite this disparity, we are only beginning to understand the
Morabito et al. 15

decision rules that police officers use to make these decisions in sexual
assault cases.
To overcome this challenge, we must first consider why issues of victim
behavior affect assessments of credibility and seem to be given weight in
sexual assault cases. In particular, a victims behavioral health challenges
should be unrelated to the police decision to arrest. More discussion is needed
about how assessment of victim behavior and challenges affects criminal jus-
tice decision making particularly when the victim and offender have an
acquaintance. New policies and practices are needed to mitigate the cumula-
tive negative effects of challenges to victim credibility and to clarify and
remedy the criminal justice response to sexual assault of those who do not
meet societal behavioral expectations. This represents an important training
issue for police and advocates, especially in the field of interpersonal
violence.
There are a number of limitations that should be addressed in this investi-
gation. First, victims engaged in many risky behaviors may be least likely
to report based on concerns that police and prosecutors would question their
credibility (Bachman, 1998), and thus, most may not have even made it into
the sample studied here. There are a number of possible reasons why a victim
may decline to participate in the criminal justice process. Personal circum-
stance such as extreme poverty or geographic isolation may prevent victims
from gaining assistance from advocates or criminal justice authorities
(DeKeseredy & Joseph, 2006; Lewis, 2003). Victims may also decline to
cooperate because of shame, fear of retaliation, or experiences of secondary
victimization by criminal justice or victim service agents (Herman, 2003).
These victims may have internalized some of the rape myths themselves and
thus may not want to cooperate with the criminal justice system (Heath,
Lynch, Fritch, & Wong, 2013). Qualitative data could better get at these
nuances in victim behavior.
Next, the literature suggests a downstream orientation held by police
and prosecutors whereby they determine whether to proceed based on their
perceived likelihood that the complaint will be successfully adjudicated
(Pattavina etal., 2016). As Venema (2014) notes, police officers express frus-
tration when the victim cannot remember the sexual assault because she was
self-medicating. The police know that the bad guy is getting away and feel
somewhat powerless but do not proceed. This downstream orientation may
explain some of the police decision making here. In addition, we do not know
whether this same orientation is held by victims. Their decision to cooperate
may be more complicated than we have operationalized it to be and not sim-
ply rest on their expected or actual interactions with the police but may reflect
a view that prosecution is unlikely. Future research should explore how this
16 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

downstream orientation applies to the most vulnerable victims. Finally, these

data were collected in Los Angeles, and it is unclear whether police response
in this jurisdiction is generalizable to the rest of the country. Additional
research is needed to make that determination.
Yet, there are some very real policy implications that arise from these find-
ings. First, we must consider why complaints of sexual assault against victims
who have many behavioral health challenges and have engaged in what is
viewed as risk taking behaviors are less likely to end in arrest. It is possible
that police are in effect triaging cases due to a lack of resources. If a dearth
of resources means that police cannot investigate every case, perhaps they are
selecting the cases that they believe are most likely to end in conviction or
those where the suspect is identified and the victim is cooperative. If this is in
fact true, communities might choose to prioritize the crime of sexual assault
and treat it similar to homicide. With a more elevated status and importance to
the community, police might be given more resources to investigate and make
arrests even in cases where the victim has these and other behavioral health
challenges and has engaged in risk taking behaviors. In turn, making
response to these cases a priority could have the ultimate effect of encouraging
more victims to report. If it becomes known that police can and do fully inves-
tigate every case and have resources to assist victims who have other chal-
lenges, then victims might be more willing to make a report, and the burden of
sexual assault may be, at least on some levels, ameliorated for these victims.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project is funded by the National
Institute of Justice (NIJ #2012-IJ-CX-0052)Decision-Making in Sexual Assault
Cases: Multi-Site Replication Research on Sexual Violence Case Attrition in the
United States.

Notes
1. We know that witnesses may not always corroborate the victims story (*).
2. Race has been dichotomized as White and non-White because the literature sug-
gests that there is a difference in the way minority/majority group victims are
treated (cf. Spohn & Holleran, 2001). Furthermore, although there are a substan-
tial number of Latino victims in the sample, it is not clear whether they identify
as White or non-White.
Morabito et al. 17

3. More information on predicted probabilities can be found in Long and Freese

(2006) and on the Institute for Digital Research and Education (IDRE; 2016a,
2016b) website.
4. Multicollinearity was investigated through an examination of correlations, none
of which exceeded .5 and most were below .3. Variance inflation factors were
also examined, and none exceeded 1.5.
5. Values for this table were estimated from models including only those factors
significant in Table 2 (Model 2).

References
Alderden, M. A., & Ullman, S. E. (2012). Gender difference or indifference? Detective
decision making in sexual assault cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27,
3-22.
Bachman, R. (1998). The factors related to rape reporting behavior and arrest new
evidence from the national crime victimization survey. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 25, 8-29.
Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2005). Prosecutorial charging decisions in sexual assault
cases: Examining the impact of a specialized prosecution unit. Criminal Justice
Policy Review, 16(4), 461-498.
Bouffard, J. A. (2000). Predicting type of sexual assault case closure from victim,
suspect, and case characteristics. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 527-542.
Campbell, R., Wasco, S., Ahrens, C., Self, T., & Barnes, H. (2001). Preventing the
second rape: Rape survivors experiences with community service providers.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1239-1259.
Davis, K. C. (1975). Police discretion (pp. 62-63). West St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
DeKeseredy, W. S., & Joseph, C. (2006). Separation and/or divorce sexual assault in
rural Ohio: Preliminary results of an exploratory study. Violence Against Women,
12, 301-311.
Du Mont, J., Miller, K. L., & Myhr, T. L. (2003). The role of real rape and real
victim stereotypes in the police reporting practices of sexually assaulted women.
Violence Against Women, 9, 466-486.
Federal Bureau of Invstigations. (2004). Uniform Crime Reports Handbook.
Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/
Feeney, F. (2000). Police clearances: A poor way to measure the impact of Miranda
on the police. Rutgers Law Journal, 32, 1-114.
Goodman, L. A., Rosenberg, S. D., Mueser, K. T., & Drake, R. E. (1997). Physical
and sexual assault history in women with serious mental illness. Schizophrenia
Bulletin, 23, 685-696.
Heath, N. M., Lynch, S. M., Fritch, A. M., & Wong, M. M. (2013). Rape myth accep-
tance impacts the reporting of rape to the police: A study of incarcerated women.
Violence Against Women, 19, 1065-1078.
Herman, J. L. (2003). The mental health of crime victims: Impact of legal interven-
tion. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16, 159-166.
18 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Hiday, V. A., Swartz, M. S., Swanson, J. W., Borum, R., & Wagner, H. R. (1999).
Criminal victimization of persons with severe mental illness. Psychiatric
Services, 50, 62-68.
Institute for Digital Research and Education. (2016a). Stata data analysis examples
ordered logistic regression. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/dae/ologit.htm.
Institute for Digital Research and Education. (2016b). Using margins for predicted
probabilities. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/dae/predictive_margins.htm.
Jordan, J. (2004). Beyond belief? Police, rape and womens credibility. Criminal
Justice, 4, 29-59.
Kerstetter, W. A. (1990). Gateway to justice: Police and prosecutorial response to
sexual assaults against women. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 81,
267-313.
Kerstetter, W. A., & Van Winkle, B. (1990). Who decides? A study of the com-
plainants decision to prosecute in rape cases. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 17,
268-283.
Kilpatrick, D. G., Resnick, H. S., Ruggiero, K. J., Conoscenti, L. M., & McCauley, J.
(2007). Drug-facilitated, incapacitated, and forcible rape: A national study (Final
report submitted to the National Institute of Justice [NCJ 219181]). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
LaFree, G. D. (1981). Official reactions to social problems: Police decisions in sexual
assault cases. Social Problems, 28, 582-594.
LaFree, G. (1989). Rape and criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lewis, S. H. (2003). Unspoken crimes: Sexual assault in rural America. Enola, PA:
National Sexual Violence Resource Center.
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent vari-
ables (2nd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
Maniglio, R. (2009). Severe mental illness and criminal victimization: A systematic
review. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 119, 180-191.
McCahill, T. W., Meyer, L. C., & Fischman, A. M. (1979). The aftermath of rape (p.
12). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Myers, M. A., & LaFree, G. D. (1982). Sexual assault and its prosecution: A compari-
son with other crimes. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 73, 1282.
Nugent-Borakove, M. E., Fanflik, P., Troutman, D., Johnson, N., Burgess, A., &
OConnor, A. L. (2006). Testing the efficacy of SANE/SART programs: Do they
make a difference in sexual assault arrest & prosecution outcomes (Document
No. 214252). Alexandria, VA: American Prosecutors Research Institute.
Pattavina, A., Morabito, M. S., & Williams, L. M. (2016). Examining connections
between the police and prosecution in sexual assault case processing: Does the
use of exceptional clearance facilitate a downstream orientation? Victims &
Offenders: Journal of Evidence-Based Policies and Practices, 11, 315-334.
Police Executive Research Forum. (2012). Improving the Police Response to Sexual
Assault. Critical Issues in Policing Series. Washington DC. Retrieved from
http://www.policeforum.org/assets/docs/Critical_Issues_Series/improving%20
the%20police%20response%20to%20sexual%20assault%202012.pdf
Morabito et al. 19

Rennison, C. M. (2002). Rape and sexual assault: Reporting to police and medi-
cal attention, 1992-2000 (NCJ 194530). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Riedel, M., & Boulahanis, J. G. (2007). Homicides exceptionally cleared and cleared
by arrest: An exploratory study of police/prosecutor outcomes. Homicide Studies,
11, 151-164.
Schuller, R. A., & Stewart, A. (2000). Police responses to sexual assault complaints:
The role of perpetrator/complainant intoxication. Law and Human Behavior, 24,
535-551.
Spears, J. W., & Spohn, C. C. (1997). The effect of evidence factors and victim char-
acteristics on prosecutors charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Justice
Quarterly, 14(3), 501-524.
Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2001). Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of charg-
ing decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and inti-
mate partners. Justice Quarterly, 18, 651-688.
Spohn, C., & Tellis, K. (2012). The criminal justice systems response to sexual vio-
lence. Violence Against Women, 18, 169-192. doi:10.1177/1077801212440020
Spohn, C., White, C., & Tellis, K. (2014). Unfounding sexual assault: Examining
the decision to unfound and identifying false reports. Law & Society Review, 48,
161-192.
Suarez, E., & Gadalla, T. M. (2010). Stop blaming the victim: A meta-analysis on
rape myths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 2010-2035.
Tasca, M., Rodriguez, N., Spohn, C., & Koss, M. P. (2013). Police decision making
in sexual assault cases: Predictors of suspect identification and arrest. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 28, 1157-1177.
Teplin, L. A., McClelland, G. M., Abram, K. M., & Weiner, D. A. (2005). Crime
victimization in adults with severe mental illness: Comparison with the National
Crime Victimization Survey. Archives of general psychiatry, 62(8), 911-921.
Tellis, K. M., & Spohn, C. C. (2008). The sexual stratification hypothesis revisited:
Testing assumptions about simple versus aggravated rape. Journal of Criminal
Justice, 36(3), 252-261.
Venema, R. M. (2014). Police Officer schema of sexual assault reports: Real rape,
ambiguous cases, and false reports. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31,
872-899.
Wekerle, C., & Hall, A.-M. (2002). The violence and addiction equation: Theoretical
and clinical issues in substance abuse and relationship violence. New York, NY:
Brunner-Routledge.

Author Biographies
Melissa Schaefer Morabito is an associate professor at University Massachusetts
Lowell in the School of Criminology and Justice Studies and an associate at the
Center for Women and Work. She has an MSW from Columbia University and
received her PhD in justice, law, and society from American University. She was
previously a postdoctoral fellow at the National Institute of Mental Healthfunded
20 Journal of Interpersonal Violence

Center for Mental Health Services and Criminal Justice Research. Prior to her aca-
demic career, she was a policy analyst at the Department of Justice Office of
Community Oriented Policing Services where she focused on police response to
social problems in the community. She has developed extensive experience with
police agencies and has worked with the Philadelphia, Chicago, and Boston police
departments. Most recently, she is a co-principal investigator on the National Institute
of Justice project, Decision-Making in Sexual Assault Cases: Replication Research on
Sexual Violence Case Attrition in the U.S. (2012-IJ-CX-0052) that examines case
processing in six jurisdictions across the United States. Her additional research inter-
ests include understanding the intersection between police and public health chal-
lenges such as mental illness, domestic violence, and drug addiction.
April Pattavina, PhD, is an associate professor in the School of Criminology and
Justice Studies at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. Her research areas include
the theoretical, policy, and social implications of justice system responses to women
who are victims of crime and the treatment of offenders under supervision by correc-
tional systems in the United States and internationally. She has been the principal
investigator or co-principal investigator on a number of federally funded projects on
topics related to violence against women. Her research has appeared in journals such
as the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Violence Against Women, Crime &
Delinquency, Victims and Offenders, and Medicine, Science and the Law.
Linda M. Williams, PhD, is a professor Emerita in the School of Criminology and
Justice Studies at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. In September 2015, she
returns to the Wellesley Centers for Women as a senior research scientist co-leading
the Justice and Gender-Based Violence Research Group. For the past 42 years, she
has directed research on violence against women, sexual exploitation of children, sex
offenders, and the consequences of child abuse including several longitudinal studies
and recent qualitative work. Author of several books and dozens of scholarly publica-
tions, she has lectured in the United States and internationally on many topics includ-
ing sexual violence and commercial sexual exploitation, trauma and memory, and
researcherpractitioner collaborations. She has been the principal investigator on 16
U.S. federally funded research projects. She recently completed work on the Office of
Victims of Crime (OVC)-funded National-Scope Demonstration Project to Integrate
Crime Victims Issues into University and College Curricula and a Centers for Disease
Control (CDC)-funded study on use of social marketing and in-person training pro-
grams to enhance bystander behaviors to prevent relationship violence on college
campuses. In 2013, she was funded by the National Institute of Justice along with
colleagues April Pattavina and Melissa Morabito to conduct a study of Decision-
Making in Sexual Assault Cases: Multi-site Replication Research on Sexual Violence
Case Attrition in the U.S.