http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/spousmur.htm U.S. Department of Justice - Office of
Justice Programs -Bureau of Justice Statistics Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban
Counties By Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D., BJS
Statistician, and John M. Dawson, former BJS statistician September 1995, NCJ-153256 (Note:
This file does not contain data tables. To receive a copy of the full report with
data tables, call the BJS Clearinghouse at 1-800-732-3277.) Bureau of Justice Statistics Jan M.
Chaiken, Ph.D. Director Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D., Statistician, Bureau of Justice Statistics, and John M.
Dawson, former BJS Statistician, wrote this report. Substantial assistance was provided by
Lawrence A. Greenfeld. Tom Hester edited and Jayne Robinson produced the
report. Data presented in this report may be
obtained from the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University
of Michigan, 1-800-999-0960. The name of the dataset is Murder in Large Urban
Counties, 1988 (ICPSR 9907). Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban
Counties ******************************* Highlights ******************************* Number of spouse murder defendants and
their demographic characteristics In 1988, the justice system in the
Nation's 75 largest counties disposed of an estimated 540 spouse murder
cases. Husbands charged with killing
their wife outnumbered wives charged with killing their husband. Of the 540, 318--or 59%--were husband defendants
and 222--or 41%--were wife defendants. Blacks comprised 55% of the 540
defendants and whites comprised 43%.Among husband defendants 51% were black
and 45% were white. Ages of spouse murder defendants ranged
from 18 to 87. The average age was
39. The average age of husband
defendants was 41; of wife defendants, 37 years. Arrest charge First-degree murder was the most
frequent charge at arrest, accounting for 70% of defendants. In descending
order of seriousness, charges were distributed this way across the 540 spouse
murder defendants: *70% first-degree murder How the justice system disposed of
spouse murder cases Cases were disposed of in one of three
ways: (1) the prosecutor declined to
prosecute; or Of the 540 spouse murder defendants,
232--or 43%--pleaded guilty to killing their spouse and 238--or 44%--pleaded
not guilty and stood trial. The remaining 70 persons--or 13%--were not
prosecuted. Outcome for spouse murder defendants who
pleaded not guilty and stood trial Of the 238 who pleaded not guilty, 63%
were tried by a jury and theremaining 37% were tried by a judge. Together, judges and juries acquitted 16%
of the 238 spouse murder defendants and convicted 84%--or 199 persons--of
killing their spouse. Bench trials (trials before a judge) had
a higher acquittal rate than jury trials:
26% of bench trials ended in acquittal, versus 11% of jury trials. Defendants convicted of killing their
spouse Of the 540 spouse murder defendants, 431
(or 80%) were ultimately convicted of killing their spouse. Their conviction was the result of either
pleading guilty (232 persons) or being convicted at trial (199 persons). While most persons arrested (70%) for
spouse murder were charged with first-degree murder, most persons convicted
(52%)of spouse murder had negligent or nonnegligent manslaughter as their
conviction offense. Sentences for defendants convicted of
killing their spouse Of the 431 defendants convicted of
killing their spouse, 89% were sentenced to a State prison, 1% were sentenced
to a county jail, and the remaining 10% received a sentence of straight
probation (no prison or jail confinement). An estimated 12% of the 431
convicted spouse murderers received a sentence to life imprisonment and 1%
received the death penalty. Excluding life and death sentences, the
average prison term imposed was 13 years. Wife defendants less likely to be
convicted Wife defendants had a lower conviction
rate than husband defendants-- *Of the 222 wife defendants, 70% were
convicted of killing their mate, By contrast, of the 318 husband defendants,
87% were convicted of spouse murder. *Of the 100 wife defendants tried by
either a judge or jury, 31% were acquitted.
But of the 138 husbands tried, 6% were acquitted. *Of the 59 wife defendants tried by a
jury, 27% were acquitted. But of the estimated 91 husband defendants tried by
a jury, none was acquitted. Convicted wife defendants sentenced less
severely An estimated 156 wives and 275 husbands
were convicted of killing their spouse. Convicted wives were less likely than
convicted husbands to be sentenced to prison, and convicted wives received
shorter prison sentences than their male counterparts-- *On average, convicted wives received prison
sentences that were about 10 years shorter than whathusbands received. Excluding life or death sentences, the
average prison sentence for killing a spouse was 6 years for wives but 16.5
years for husbands. *Among wives sentenced to prison, 15%
received a sentence of 20 years or more (including life imprisonment and the
death penalty); among husbands, it was 43%. Victim provocation more often present in
wife defendant cases According to information contained in
prosecutor files, more wife defendants (44%) than husband defendants (10%)
had been assaulted by their spouse (threatened with a weapon or physically
assaulted) at or around the time of the murder. Self-defense as possible explanation for
wives' lower conviction rate In certain circumstances, extreme victim
provocation may justify taking a life in self-defense. Provocation was more often present in wife
defendant cases, and wife defendants were less likely than husband defendants
to be convicted, suggesting that the relatively high rate of victim
provocation characteristic of wife defendant cases was one of the reasons
wife defendants had a lower conviction rate than husband defendants. Consistent with that, of the provoked wife
defendants, 56% were convicted, significantly lower than either the 86%
conviction rate for unprovoked wife defendants or the 88% conviction rate for
unprovoked husbands. No explanation for why State prison
sentences were, on average, 10 years shorter for wife defendants than husband
defendants Wives received shorter prison
sentences than husbands (a 10-year
difference, on average) even when the comparison is restricted to defendants
who were alike in terms of whether or not they were provoked-- *The average prison sentence for
unprovoked wife defendants was 7 years, or 10 years shorter than the average
17 years for unprovoked husband defendants. Victim's race unrelated to outcomes The victim was black in 55% of cases and
white in 43%. The likelihood of a defendant being convicted of spouse murder
was about the same whether the murder victim was white or black. Among spouse murder defendants whose victim
was white, 81% were convicted. Among
those whose victim was black, 79% were convicted. Likewise, the sentence was unrelated to
the victim's race. The likelihood of a convicted spouse murderer receiving a
prison sentence was about the same whether the murder victim was white or
black: the convicted spouse murderer
was sentenced to prison in 93% of cases where the victim was white, not
significantly different from the 87% of cases where the victim was
black. The length of the prison
sentence imposed on a convicted spouse murderer was generally unrelated to
whether the murder victim was white or black-- *For conviction for first-degree murder,
the average prison term (excluding life and death sentences) was 29 years in
white-victim cases, not significantly different from the 32 years in
black-victim cases. *For conviction for second-degree
murder, the average prison term (excluding life sentences) was 19 years in
white-victim cases, significantly longer than the 13 years in black-victim
cases. However, 23% of convicted second-degree murder defendants in
black-victim cases received a sentence of life imprisonment, compared to 8%
of defendants in white-victim cases. *For conviction for nonnegligent
manslaughter, the average prison term (excluding life sentences) was 8 years
in white-victim cases, not significantly different from the average 6 years
in black-victim cases. Defendant's race unrelated to outcomes The likelihood of conviction, and of a
prison sentence if convicted, and the length of the prison sentence were
about the same whether the spouse murder defendant was white or black-- *78% of white defendants were convicted,
not significantly different from the 80% of black defendants. *Among convicted spouse murderers, 93%
of white defendants were sentenced to prison, not significantly different
from the 88% of black defendants. Processing time Three measures of processing time were
taken from the day of the murder--to arrest, to indictment, and to final
disposition. Most spouse murder
defendants were arrested on the same day the killing occurred. Average time
to indictment was 4 months. Average time to final disposition was almost exactly
1 year. For husbands tried by a jury, 12 1/2
months was the average elapsed time from the day of the murder to the
conclusion of the jury trial. For
wives tried by a jury it was significantly longer, about 18 1/2 months. ******************************** In 1988 State prosecutors, judges, and
juries across the 75 most populous U.S. counties convicted, acquitted, or
otherwise disposed of an estimated 9,600 murder defendants. Six percent--or an estimated 540
defendants--were persons charged with murdering their spouse. Information on
the 540 comes from a representative sample of murder cases disposed of in
1988. The sample was drawn from State
prosecutor files in 33 of the 75 counties.
The counties were widely scattered, from Los Angeles and San Diego,
Denver and Dallas, to Philadelphia and Dade County (Miami). For each
defendant, data collectors filled out a lengthy questionnaire and prepared a
brief narrative from file information. Prosecutor files include such items as
the police arrest report, investigator reports, and information on how the
case was disposed. Questionnaires and
narratives are the sources of data for this report. The 75 largest counties are where a
little over half of all murders in the Nation occur. (The Nation consists of 3,109 counties;
thus, murders are concentrated in a relatively small number of places). Consequently, survey results summarized in
this report have broad relevance because they are from the courts where the
majority of the Nation's murder trials are held. This case processing study of spouse murder
defendants is the most geographically comprehensive study on the topic. While
the survey covers murder cases processed 7 years ago in 1988, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics knows from long experience with surveying courts that
changes in case processing are quite gradual. The report's results are
therefore likely to be applicable today. The same database used in this report
was previously analyzed by John M. Dawson and Barbara Boland (Murder in Large
Urban Counties, 1988, BJS Special Report, NCJ-140614, May 1993) and by John
M. Dawson and Patrick A. Langan (Murder in Families, BJS Special Report,
NCJ-143498, July 1994). ********************************************* Sex of defendant Husbands outnumbered wives as spouse
murder defendants. Of the 540
defendants, 318--or 59%--were husbands charged with killing their wife, and
222--or 41%--were wives charged with killing their husband. By definition, the 540 included no divorced
couples but did include both common-law and separated spouses. (Case narratives indicate that 8% were
separated, but the actual figure was probably greater than that because
separation status was probably not always recorded.) Year and location of murder About eighty percent of the alleged
murders that were disposed of in 1988 occured in 1988 or 1987. The rest were
earlier, dating to 1975 in one case.
Nearly 90% took place in the home. Time to arrest In about 80% of cases, defendants were
arrested either on the day of the murder or on the following day. Murder weapon More of the wives (95%) than the
husbands (69%) used a gun or knife to inflict death. For a smaller person to kill a larger
person (such as for a wife to kill her husband), a lethal weapon is generally
required. Race and age of defendants Of the 540 defendants, 55% were black
and 43% were white. Among husbands
charged with spouse murder, 51% were black and 45% were white. Among wives charged, 61% were black and 39%
were white. Ninety-seven percent of the murders were intraracial. One percent were black husbands killing
white wives. Other interracial
murders--either white husbands killing black wives, white wives killing black
husbands, or black wives killing white husbands--accounted for the remaining
2%. (Historical data for the United States indicate that the risk of spouse
murder is over 7 times greater for spouses in interracial than intraracial
marriages. See James A. Mercy and
Linda E. Saltzman, "Fatal Violence among Spouses in the United States,
1976-85," American Journal of Public Health, May 1989, Vol. 79, No 5.) Ages of spouse murder defendants ranged
from 18 to 87. On average, spouse
murder defendants (mean age 39) were considerably older than murder
defendants overall (mean age 28). The
average age of husband defendants was 41 years; of wife defendants, 37
years. Arrest charge The sample consisted exclusively of
persons charged with (in descending order of seriousness) first-degree
murder, second- (or third-) degree murder, or nonnegligent (or voluntary)
manslaughter-- First-degree murder is premeditated
murder (for example, murder by poisoning, murder while lying in wait) or
felony murder (for example, rape-murder, robbery-murder). Second- (or third-) degree murder is all
other murder. Nonnegligent manslaughter is willful
killing, without premeditation, in the heat of passion. Less serious classes of
homicide--namely, negligent manslaughter and justifiable homicide--were not
sampled. However, some defendants
initially charged with one of the moreserious homicides were ultimately
convicted of negligent homicide.
Likewise, some initially charged with criminal homicide were later
exonerated on grounds they acted in self-defense. First-degree murder was the predominant
initial charge. Charges were
distributed in this way-- *first-degree murder: 70% Similarities between defendants Certain characteristics did not vary
significantly between husband defendants and wife defendants-- Number of victims *4% of husbands and 1% of wives had been
charged with killing more than one person.
(Counting as multiple murder all those committed against pregnant
women, the percentage of men with multiple victims then becomes 5%, a
conservative estimate since pregnancy was not recorded in every case.) Percentage that were contract killings *3% of husbands and 6% of wives had been
charged with a contract killing. Percentage with history of mental
illness *11% of husband defendants and 15% of
wife defendants had a history of mental illness. Percentage that involved a firearm *50% of husbands and 58% of wives had
used a firearm. Differences between defendants Certain characteristics did vary
significantly between husband defendants and wife defendants-- *More husbands (20%) than wives (10%)
had killed in a fit of jealousy over the mate's real or imagined infidelity. *More husbands (31%) than wives (9%) had
a history of drug abuse.) *More husbands (22%) than wives (3%) had
been using drugs at the time of the murder. *More husbands (66%) than wives (37%)
had been drinking alcohol at the time of the murder. (Altogether, 55% of defendants were
drinking at the time of the murder. Drinking, either by the defendant or the victim, was involved in
66% of cases.) *********************************************** Following the defendant's arrest,
prosecutors review the case, deciding whether to screen it out or to
prosecute. (As used throughout the report, cases "disposed by the
prosecutor" include cases screened out, rejected, declined for
prosecution, cases classified as nolle prosequi, and cases in which the judge
dismissed charges.) Of the 540 defendants, 70--or 13%--were
not prosecuted. Prosecutors did not
screen out significantly more of the wives than the husbands-- *16% of wives and 11% of husbandswere
not prosecuted Most of the wives not prosecuted were
screened out because prosecutors concluded from the evidence that these wives
had killed their husband in self-defense.
By contrast, self-defense was rarely the reason prosecutors gave for
not prosecuting husbands. For
husbands, reasons were more diverse:
he committed suicide after killing his wife; he took her life in a
mercy killing or in a gun accident. Spouse murder defendants not prosecuted Notes taken on prosecutors' records
(case numbers are those assigned in the dataset. Notes are not necessarily complete in
having all relevant details): Dallas case #79 The wife (the victim) is
89 and has been married 65 years. A recent stroke leaves her in terrible
pain. She pleads with the doctor to kill her.
The doctor refuses. The 87-year-old husband goes to the hospital and
shoots her. He is immediately
arrested. New Orleans case #54 For years, the 43-year-old husband (the
victim), a dry cleaner operator, has beaten his 35-year-old wife. At the time of the murder the two are
fighting, and the husband stabs her in the back. She grabs the knife and stabs
him, causing him to bleed to death. She is arrested the same day. She claims
self-defense, and the victim's family voices no objection. New Orleans case #95 The 28-year-old husband (the victim) has a
long history of assaulting his 25-year-old
wife. At the time of the murder
a witness sees the husband in the kitchen chasing the wife with a machete in
his hand. The fight ends when the wife
stabs the husband once. She is arrested the same day and claims self-defense.
Los Angeles case #21 During
an argument the 50-year-old housewife (the victim) pulls out a gun and
threatens to kill her 39-year-old unemployed husband. The two struggle. He flees the house and gets in his
car. She moves in front of the car,
raises the gun and takes aim. He runs over her. He is arrested a day later. Columbus (OH) case #2 The wife, age 75, has mental problems. One morning, while her husband (the
victim), a 75-year-old retired welder, is still asleep, she stabs him to
death. She says she heard a voice tell her to kill him. Orange County (CA) case #64 When police arrive at the scene, they find
the body of the wife (the victim) with
15 stab wounds and the husband's body with 5.
Police believe there was an argument, the husband stabbed the wife in
a struggle, and then sliced his own neck.
Both have been dead for 1 or 2 days. San Diego case #89 Three weeks before the murder the
32-year-old husband beats his 35-year-old wife (the victim) severely. She
tells others that next time he is going to kill her. She wants a divorce, but
he wants a reconciliation. On the day
of the murder, the two are at a bar, and he is drinking. Later a witness sees her outside a car in
the middle of the street. The wife
screams, then slumps to the ground, dying from multiple stab wounds in the
chest. The husbands flees the scene. Later he is found dead from a drug
overdose. Orlando (FL) case #7 The husband comes home drunk and demands
money from his wife. She refuses, and he attacks her with a metal pipe. She
gets a butcher knife from the kitchen and stabs him once through the heart. Overall, 44% of spouse murder defendants
pleaded not guilty and stood trial.
Percentages standing trial were nearly identical for husband
defendants and wife defendants-- *45% of wives and 43% of husbands stood
trial Convictions and acquittals Among spouse murder defendants who stood
trial, 16% were acquitted and 84% were convicted. Judges and juries acquitted more wives than
husbands-- *31% of wives who stood trial were
acquitted, compared to just 6% of husbands. Insanity acquittals, however, were
equally likely-- *Among spouses who stood trial, 3% of
wives and husbands were found not guilty by reason of insanity. (The number who pleaded not guilty by
reason of insanity but who were convicted is unknown.) Those who went to trial and those
ultimately convicted at trial did not differ in terms of arrest offense-- *Most of those who went to trial (69%)
and most of those who were convicted at trial (70%) had first-degree murder
as their arrest offense. About 2% had a nonnegligent manslaughter arrest. However, trial conviction offenses were
less serious than arrest offenses-- *Among those convicted at trial, 70% had
first-degree murder as their arrest offense but 35% had first-degree murder
as their conviction offense. A quarter of those convicted at trial had
nonnegligent manslaughter as their conviction offense. The reduction from first-degree murder
to a lesser charge did not occur at indictment: Of all trial defendants, 95% were indicted at
the same level as their arrest offense. Nor did the small number of
first-degree murder convictions result from a higher rate of acquittal: Acquittal rates did not vary significantly
by charge level. Rather, the reason might have been that
the evidence did not support conviction to the highest charge, or perhaps
juries could seldom agree on conviction to the highest level. What-ever the reason, where there was a
conviction, it was to a lesser charge in about half of cases, whether the
defendant was the wife or the husband-- *49% of wives and 47% of husbands
convicted at trial had a conviction offense less serious than their original
arrest offense. Bench trials (trials before a judge) had
a higher acquittal rate than jury trials-- *26% of bench trials ended in acquittal,
versus 11% of jury trials. Overall, 63% of defendants who stood
trial were tried by a jury, and the remaining 37% were tried by a judge. Wives were not significantly more likely
than husbands to choose a bench trial-- *41% of wife defendants and 34% of
husband defendants chose a bench trial rather than a jury trial. Wives were more likely than husbands to
be acquitted by a jury-- *Juries acquitted 27% of wives but none
of the husbands. (The unweighted sample size was 34 husbands tried before a
jury. Not one of the 34 was acquitted.
Extrapolated to the 75 largest counties, the 34 represent an estimated 91
cases.) Despite a sizable difference in the
bench trial acquittal rate between wives and husbands, the difference was not
statistically significant, possibly because estimates were based on too few
sample cases-- *Judges acquitted 37% of wives and 17%
of husbands). Sentencing of those convicted at trial While wives were not significantly less
likely than husbands to receive a prison sentence, the length of their prison
sentence was shorter than what husbands received-- *An estimated 82% of wives and 95% of
husbands convicted at trial of killing their spouse received a prison
sentence. ("Convicted of killing their spouse" is not precisely
correct, since one of the defendants, a husband, was convicted of only a
weapon offense. All the rest were
convicted of killing or assisting in the killing of a spouse.) *Wives convicted at trial received an
average sentence to prison of 10 years, 11 years shorter than what husbands
received (an average 21-year term in prison). ****************************************** Notes taken on prosecutors' records: Miami case #84 The couple has an
on-again, off-again relationship for 20 years. Several weeks prior to the
murder, she sees her common-law husband (the victim) leave a motel with
another woman. Subsequently, the couple has several violent confrontations
until one day she shoots him. Outcome: The jury acquitted her of all charges.
Chicago case #15 The couple is arguing
when the 25-year-old wife finds a love letter to her 25-year-old husband (the
victim, a fast-food restaurant employee) from a co-worker. The wife gets a kitchen knife and stabs
him. She claims she was a victim of battered wife syndrome and was only
defending herself. Outcome: At a bench trial the judge acquitted her. Chicago case #28 The couple is arguing
when the 64-year-old husband (the victim) swings a pipe at his 34-year-old
wife. She gets a knife and stabs him to death. Outcome: The jury acquitted
her. Chicago case #52 The 49-year-old husband
(the victim) is drunk and gets into an argument with his 50-year-old wife.
According to her, at some point he throws a fan at her. She gets a knife and lunges at him, cutting
his abdomen. Outcome: The jury acquitted her. Philadelphia case #47 The 35-year-old
husband (the victim) comes home drunk after work and begins fighting with his
31-year-old common-law wife over money he is missing. The husband is throwing things at the wife
and her children until she gets a knife and stabs the husband once in the
chest. Outcome: At a bench trial the judge acquitted her. Cambridge (MA) case #16 The 38-year-old
husband has been hospitalized several times for mental illness. He feels
everyone is out to get him. He comes home one evening and sees his
30-year-old wife (the victim) talking with a friend. He immediately thinks she is talking about
him, and he later strangles her. Outcome: At a bench trial the judge found
him not guilty by reason of insanity. Dallas case #65 The unemployed 58-year-old husband is
released from a mental hospital two weeks before the murder. He fears his 56-year-old wife (the victim),
a secretary, will leave him for another man and have him put back in the
mental hospital. He stabs her to
death. Outcome: At a bench trial the judge found him not guilty by reason of
insanity. St. Louis case #9 The wife, now age 42, has grown
increasingly depressed over the years.
On the day of the murder she is so distraught she shoots her
51-year-old husband (the victim) several times in the head while he is
napping. Outcome: The jury found her not guilty by reason of insanity. Detroit case #98 The two are out drinking. They return home and begin arguing. According to the wife, age 30, her
25-year-old husband (the victim) attacked her. She grabs a knife and stabs
him. She claims he has beaten her
before. No witnesses are present at
the time of the murder. Outcome: She was acquitted of second-degree murder at
a bench trial. Manhattan case #72 She, a 29-year-old artist, has lived with
her 47-year-old common-law husband (the victim), a musician, for a few
years. He frequently beats, starves,
and tortures her. He repeatedly tells
her he is going to kill her. For some
time leading up to the murder, he has not let her eat or shower. On the day of the murder they are going to
a bar when she asks him to let her go home because she is tired. He says "no" and begins hitting
her and calling her names. The beating
ends when she stabs him. He has
numerous past arrests and convictions. Outcome: The jury acquitted her. ************************************************************* Notes taken on prosecutors' records Oklahoma City case #24 The 59-year-old husband (the victim) comes
home intoxicated and continues drinking.
His 52-year-old wife claims he became violent and began to beat
her. She says she shot him in self-defense. The prosecution counters that there are no
bruises or other signs of a beating.
The prosecution contends she shot him while he lay in bed
sleeping. Outcome: The jury convicted her of first-degree
murder. She was sentenced to life
imprisonment. Rochester (NY) case #26 Throughout their turbulent 4-year marriage,
the husband (the victim) verbally and physically abuses his wife. She never once leaves him, though. Prior to the night of the murder, the
husband buys a gun and puts it in his dresser. The night of the murder, the husband is
slapping the wife around, telling her to get out of the house. He calls the
police to have her removed from the premises.
While he is on the phone, telling police "she's a whore,"
the wife grabs his gun and shoots him four times. Outcome:
The jury convicted her of second-degree murder. She was sentenced to 15 years in
prison. Bakersfield (CA) case #34 The husband (the victim) and wife jointly
own a bar. She claims he showed up at
the bar angry at her about something and slapped her. She says she became scared, saw a gun, and
shot him. The prosecution disputes that, contending instead she murdered him
so that she would gain sole ownership of the bar. Outcome:
The jury found her guilty of nonnegligent manslaughter. She was sentenced to 8 years in prison. Philadelphia case #169 They have been married 20 years. Both are heavy drinkers. During an argument he, a longshoreman, hits
his 53-year-old wife (the victim) on the head, and several days later she
dies. Evidence is uncovered that she was a battered wife. The couple's children testify that he has
beaten her for at least 15 years. She
has been to hospitals throughout the city for cuts and bruises inflicted by
him. He has a long history of arrests
and convictions. Outcome: The jury convicted him of negligent
manslaughter. He was sentenced to 3
years in prison. Oklahoma City case #1 The 35-year-old husband has threatened his
29-year-old wife (the victim) in the past.
The threats cause her to leave him.
On the day of the murder she is drinking and returns to his apartment
with her mother to get clothes and food.
He is there and also has been drinking. He stabs to death both her and her
mother. He then flees. He has numerous prior arrests and
convictions. Outcome: The jury found him guilty of two counts of
first-degree murder. He was sentenced
to the death penalty. San Diego case #15 He, age 41, has been sadistically abusing
his 41-year-old wife (the victim) for about 8 years. He frequently binds, gags, and blindfolds
her and forces her to perform sex acts on him. He sometimes cuts and burns her while she
is bound. A year prior to the murder
she calls the police following a beating.
He is arrested and convicted and then thrown out of the Navy,
terminating a 22-year career. Soon after, they separate. On the night of the murder, he has drunk
about 20 beers and calls his estranged wife, ordering her to take off her
clothes and await his arrival. When he
enters her apartment, she is nude and holds out her wrists to him. He binds, gags and blindfolds her, cuts her
with a knife, and wraps tape and rope around her neck, strangling her. Hours
later he is arrested. He admits
killing her and intending to do so for some time. He blames her for ruining his career,
saying he was going to kill her sooner or later. Outcome:
The jury convicted him of first-degree murder. He was sentenced to 26 years in prison. Seattle case #32 Two weeks before the murder, the
43-year-old husband, an aircraft worker, is jailed for assaulting his
31-year-old wife (the victim). She and
the children then move out of the house.
On the day of the murder the children are being watched by a
babysitter in their new lodgings. The
wife returns home and the husband appears out of hiding. He orders the
babysitter to lie down and tells the wife that she is going to watch the
babysitter die. He begins stabbing the
babysitter in the back, but the babysitter breaks free. The husband turns his attack on the wife,
who dies from multiple stab wounds.
Outcome: The jury convicted him of
first-degree murder. He was sentenced
to 45 years in prison. Brooklyn case #54 The 52-year-old husband suspects his
45-year-old wife (the victim) is having an affair. While at home the two argue and she, a
factory worker, admits to the affair.
He bludgeons her with a hammer. Outcome: The jury found him guilty of using a
dangerous weapon (other than a firearm). He was sentenced to straight
probation (no confinement in prison or jail). Dallas case #178 The wife (the victim), 24-year-old postal
clerk, is having an affair with another man.
The 26-year-old husband arrives at the other man's house and finds his
wife in bed with the man. The husband
shoots and kills them both.
Outcome: The jury convicted him
of two counts of nonnegligent manslaughter. He was sentenced to 50 years in
prison. Riverside (CA) case #1 The husband (the victim) beats and abuses
his wife for many years. One night,
after being abused, she gets up, grabs a rifle and shoots him while he is sleeping. She then takes her children and flees.
Outcome: The jury found her guilty of
nonnegligent manslaughter. She was
sentenced to 8 years in prison. ********************************************** Of the 540 defendants, 43% pleaded
guilty to killing their spouse. Wives
and husbands were about equally likely to plead guilty-- *39% of wives and 46% of husbands
pleaded guilty to killing their spouse. The vast majority of pleas were to a
reduced charge-- *Most of those who pleaded guilty (67%)
had first-degree murder as their arrest offense. Ten percent had nonnegligent manslaughter. *The guilty plea was to first-degree
murder in just 10% of cases and to nonnegligent manslaughter in 58% of the
spouse murder cases. Comparing husbands and wives who pleaded
guilty to killing a spouse, wife defendants were more likely than husband
defendants to have been arrested for the least serious degree of murder,
nonnegligent manslaughter (19% of wives and 5% of husbands). Having less serious arrest offenses in the
first place, the offenses they pleaded guilty to therefore tended also to be
less serious than those of husbands-- *When wives pleaded guilty, the plea was
to manslaughter (negligent or nonnegligent) in 87% of cases; but when
husbands pleaded guilty, the plea was to manslaughter in 60%. Nevertheless, a plea to reduced charges
was no more likely among wives than husbands-- *When wives pleaded guilty, the
plea was to a reduced charge in 71% of
cases; and when husbands pleaded guilty, the plea was to a reduced charge
about as often, in 76% of cases. Sentencing of those who pleaded
guilty Probably the majority of guilty pleas
were the product of negotiation between the prosecution and the defense. In such negotiations a "bargain"
is struck. In exchange for the
prosecutor reducing the seriousness or number of charges (a charge
reduction), the defendant agrees to plead guilty. Or, in exchange for the prosecutor's
recommending a less severe sentence (a sentence reduction), the defendant
agrees to plead guilty as charged. Plea bargains have advantages for both
sides. To the prosecutor hampered by
an evidence problem, for instance, the guilty plea at least assures
conviction, even if not to the most serious charge. To the guilty defendant, a plea bargain
will usually result in a reduced sentence from what might otherwise have been
imposed. The advantage of pleading guilty to
homicide is not always immediately obvious to the defendant deciding whether
to plead guilty. A trial offers at
least the chance of acquittal, whereas pleading guilty guarantees conviction
and makes prison a near certainty.
However, the possible advantage of a guilty plea becomes clear when
sentences are compared between spouse murder defendants convicted at trial
and those convicted through a guilty plea-- *Though guilty plea and trial conviction
cases were about equally likely to receive a prison sentence (88% and 90%,
respectively), a life sentence was given to 1% of those who pleaded guilty
but 25% of those who were convicted at trial. *Among those sentenced to prison but not
to a life term, the average prison sentence was 10 1/2 years for defendants
who pleaded guilty but 17 years for defendants convicted at trial. These longer sentences for defendants
convicted at trial were to some extent in line with the lower likelihood of
their receiving a charge reduction-- *When defendants pleaded guilty, the
plea was to a reduced charge in 74% of cases; but when they were convicted at
trial, the conviction was to a reduced charge in 48% of cases). Partly reflecting their less serious
conviction offenses, wives were given less severe sentences than
husbands. Although wives were not
significantly less likely than husbands to receive a prison sentence, the
length of their prison sentence was shorter than that of husbands-- *Of those who pleaded guilty, 81% of
wives and 93% of husbands were sentenced to State prison. *4 years was the average prisonsentence
length for wives who pleaded guilty, 10 years shorter than the 14-year
average for husbands who entered a guilty plea. ********************************************* Notes taken on prosecutors' records: Philadelphia case #69 Both are retired. They have been married 47 years. The 65-year-old wife (the victim) has
recently suffered a stroke. Her health and state of mind deteriorate
rapidly. According to her 68-year-old
husband, she had become "mentally disturbed." He feels he can no longer meet her health
demands and decides to "put her out of her misery." He shoots her with a rifle. Outcome:
He pleaded guilty to nonnegligent manslaughter and was sentenced to
straight probation (no confinement in prison or jail). Queens (NY) case #5 According to neighbors, the husband and his
common-law wife (the victim) regularly get drunk and argue. On the day of the murder, they are arguing
and the common-law husband places his 69-year-old wife in a sofa bed and closes
it. He later says he tried but was
unable to open it. She dies in the
sofa bed. Outcome: He pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter
and was sentenced to straight probation (no confinement in prison or jail). San Diego case #1 The husband is a construction worker and
the wife is on welfare. The
23-year-old husband (the victim) beats his 21-year-old wife and their
18-month-old daughter the night prior to the murder. On the night of the murder, the wife and
her husband are asleep in their bedroom and the daughter is in another
room. The child begins to cry, waking
the husband. He orders the wife to
stop the child's crying. The wife
leaves the bedroom, returns with a gun and shoots the husband. Evidence
emerges that the wife and the daughter have been repeatedly physically abused
by the victim. Hospital examination at
the time of the murder finds multiple bruises on the child and the
defendant in various stages of healing. Outcome:
She pleaded guilty to nonnegligent manslaughter and was sentenced to
10 months in prison. New Haven case #2 She, a 28-year-old secretary, suffers years
of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of her 30-year-old husband (the
victim). Several times he tries to
kill her. She stays with him at first
because she thinks he will stop; then because she fears he will find her
wherever she goes; and then because she fears losing her kids. At some point she buys a gun to defend
herself. On the night of the murder
she thinks he is possibly going to kill her.
In the middle of a beating she grabs the gun from under the mattress
and shoots him. Outcome: She pleaded guilty to negligent
manslaughter and was sentenced to straight probation (no confinement in
prison or jail). Pittsburgh case #15 The husband (the victim) has a history of
beating his wife. On the night of the
murder, the husband comes home and begins ordering her around, as he
frequently does. The wife leaves the
room. When she returns she notices him looking through the closet for his
gun. The wife earlier hid it under the bed.
While he is searching, the wife retrieves the gun and shoots him
repeatedly. She claims she was tired
of the abuse. Outcome: She pleaded guilty to nonnegligent
manslaughter and was sentenced to straight probation (no confinement in
prison or jail). Ft. Lauderdale case #62 Late one night the husband (the victim) and
the wife, a mail carrier, are arguing.
Police arrive and convince the husband to leave for the night. The wife locks the door, arms herself with
a handgun and sleeps in the hall. The
husband returns the next morning, enters the apartment, and finds the wife
locked in the bathroom. When the
husband tries to get into the bathroom, the wife fires a shot through the
door, striking the husband in the leg. The action moves into the bedroom
where the husband is shot in the head.
Outcome: She pleaded guilty to
nonnegligent manslaughter and was sentenced to straight probation (no
confinement in prison or jail). Austin (TX) case #4 The husband (the victim) and his common-law
wife, a housekeeper, frequently drink and fight. On the day of the murder, both are
intoxicated and begin fighting. The
wife gets a gun and shoots her husband.
She then calls the police. The
wife has injuries she says she received from being beaten by her common-law
husband. Outcome: She pleaded guilty
to negligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 10 years in prison. Dayton (OH) case #3 The husband (the victim) and his common-law
wife are arguing about a variety of things.
Throughout the argument the husband beats her. When the common-law husband comes after her
in the kitchen, she grabs a knife. She
stabs him in the back as he is walking away.
Outcome: She pleaded guilty to
negligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 2 years in prison. Albuquerque case #9 Both are unemployed. One week before the murder, the 22-year-old
husband is released from prison and moves in with his 22-year-old wife (the
victim), who is living at his grandmother's house. At the time of the murder the wife tells
the husband that she wishes to leave him to be with a man she was seeing
while the husband was in prison. She
also informs him that she might be pregnant by the other man. The husband strangles her, tells the
grandmother he killed his wife, and calls police. Family members and friends say he has a
history of assaulting his wife and threatening her life. He also has a long criminal record. Outcome:
He pleaded guilty to nonnegligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 16
years in prison. Prince George's County (MD) case #13 On
the night of the murder, the husband and a friend pick up the wife (the
victim) and are driving down the road when the husband stops to "repair
the car." While the husband is
looking under the hood, the friend begins slashing the wife with a
razor. The husband states he earlier
joked with the friend about killing her, but he claims he did not really mean
it. Seeing her suffering, he says, he
shoots her to put her out of her misery.
Outcome: The husband pleaded
guilty to first-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison. New Haven (CT) case #7 The couple have a history of physical
abuse. The 56-year-old husband has a stab wound inflicted by his 38-year-old
wife (the victim) in an earlier altercation.
On the day of the murder the husband claims his wife jumped on him and
said she was going to kill him. He
stabs her to death. He has a long
history of arrests and convictions.
Outcome: He pleaded guilty to
nonnegligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Denver case #18 He is a 34-year-old steel mill worker, and
she is a 24-year-old waitress. An
argument develops between the two, partly over whether the pregnant wife (the
victim) should have an abortion. The
husband tells her to leave. She
refuses. She threatens him with a
knife. He gains control of the knife and stabs her. Outcome:
He pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 24
years in prison. Memphis case #2 The 39-year-old husband claims that, during
an argument, his 34-year-old wife (the victim) beat him with a phone. The wife is much larger than the
husband. The husband states that the
wife went for a handgun kept in a closet and the two struggled over it. In the struggle the gun fires once, killing
the wife. The husband then calls
police. Outcome: The husband pleaded
guilty to negligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 2 years in prison. Cambridge (MA) case #2 Both the 58-year-old husband, a mail clerk,
and his 44-year-old wife (the victim) have been hospitalized for psychiatric
disorders. On the day of the murder
the wife returns from a 6-month stay at a mental hospital. She refuses to take her medication and,
according to the defendant, goes crazy.
She threatens the husband with a broken bottle, begins hallucinating,
and beats the husband. For hours he
tries to calm her until, at one point, he applies too much pressure to her
neck and she dies. Outcome: The husband pleaded guilty to nonnegligent
manslaughter and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Oklahoma City case #30 The 29-year-old wife (the victim) accuses
the 32-year-old husband of being interested in another woman. An argument turns into a fight. The wife is armed with a kitchen
knife. The husband has scissors. Both sustain stab wounds, but her wounds
are fatal. Outcome: The husband
pleaded guilty to negligent manslaughter and was sentenced to 5 years in
prison. Philadelphia case #96 Both are retired. The 73-year-old husband has Alzheimer's
disease, causing him to be confused at times.
On the day of the murder he
decides to kill his 73-year-old wife (the victim). He beats her to death with a crowbar and
then calls police. Outcome: The husband pleaded guilty to nonnegligent
manslaughter and was sentenced to straight probation (no confinement in prison or jail). ********************************************************** All sampled defendants were charged with
murdering a spouse, and all were disposed of in 1988. How they were disposed of varied-- *Not prosecuted: 13% Although wives were not significantly
less likely than husbands to be prosecuted (16% versus 11%), or to stand
trial (45% versus 43%), or to plead guilty (39% versus 46%), they were less
likely than husbands to be convicted of killing their spouse-- *30% of wives but 13% of husbands were
either not prosecuted or were prosecuted but acquitted at trial. *Conversely, 70% of wives were convicted
of killing their spouse,versus 87% of husbands). Wives were about half as likely as
husbands to be convicted of first-degree or second-degree murder-- *25% of wives but 46% of husbands were
convicted of first-degree or second-degree murder. Nevertheless, the percentage of husbands
and wives convicted of a lesser offense (an offense less serious than the one
they were arrested for) did not differ significantly-- *3% of wives and 54% of husbands were
convicted of a lesser offense. The likelihood of conviction did not
vary significantly by arrest offense-- *78% of defendants arrested for
first-degree murder were convicted, compared to 84% of defendants arrested
for second-degree murder or nonnegligent manslaughter. The likelihood of conviction to reduced
charges was associated with the seriousness of the arrest offense. The more serious the arrest offense, the
more likely the conviction was to a reduced charge-- *53% of defendants arrested for
first-degree murder were convicted of a lesser offense, versus 29% of
defendants arrested for nonnegligent manslaughter. Wives were less likely than husbands to
be convicted and sentenced to prison-- *57% of wives were convicted and
sentenced to prison for killing their spouse, compared to 81% of husbands. ************************************************************* Among convicted defendants, virtually
all were convicted of either murder or manslaughter. Because of charge reduction, conviction
offenses were generally less serious than arrest offenses. Charge reduction was more common in arrests
for first-degree murder than nonnegligent manslaughter-- *Among convicted defendants whose arrest
was for first-degree murder, 68% had a conviction offense less serious than
their arrest offense. *Among convicted defendants whose arrest was for
nonnegligent manslaughter, 34% had a conviction offense less serious than
their arrest offense. Among those convicted, the conviction
offense differed markedly from the arrest offense-- *The predominant arrest offense of
convicted defendants was the most serious form of homicide, first-degree
murder (68%). *But the predominant conviction offense
was the least serious form, negligent or nonnegligent manslaughter. Convicted wives were more likely than
convicted husbands to have manslaughter as their conviction offense-- *64% of convicted wives had manslaughter
(negligent or nonnegligent) as their conviction offense, compared to 46% of
convicted husbands. Still, charge reduction was not more
common among convicted wives than convicted husbands-- *61% of convicted wives had a lesser
offense (an offense less serious than their arrest offense) as their
conviction offense, compared to 62% of convicted husbands. Wives convicted of killing their husband
were generally sentenced less severely than husbands convicted of killing
their wife-- *A smaller percentage of convicted wives
(81%) than convicted husbands (94%) received a prison sentence. *However, convicted wives (8%) were not
significantly less likely than convicted husbands (15%) to receive a life
sentence. *There was a significant difference
between the percentages of wives and husbands receiving a prison sentence of
20 or more years (including life imprisonment and the death penalty). Among wives sentenced to prison, 15%
received a sentence of 20 years or more; among husbands, 43%. *Excluding life or death sentences, the
average prison sentence was 6 years for wives convicted of killing their
husband, about 10 years shorter than the average 16 1/2 years husbands
received for killing their wife. Penalties imposed on convicted spouse
murder defendants varied according to the seriousness of the murder, with
first-degree murder punished most severely and negligent manslaughter least
severely-- * For conviction for first-degree murder
least severe penalty--10 years in prison
most severe penalty--death life in prison--36% average non-life prison
sentence--31 years. *For conviction for second-degree murder
least severe penalty--straight probation
most severe penalty--life in prison life in prison--17% average non-life
prison sentence--16 years. *For conviction for nonnegligent
manslaughter least severe penalty--straight probation
most severe penalty--50 years in prison life in prison--0% average non-life
prison sentence--7 years. *For conviction for negligent
manslaughter least severe penalty--straight probation
most severe penalty--10 years in prison life in prison--0% average non-life
prison sentence--5 years. ***************************************** Time to arrest: All cases
Most spouse murder defendants were arrested on the same day the killing
occurred. Consequently, the median
number of days from the day of the murder to the day the defendant was
arrested was 0 days. The mean was 28
days. Time to indictment: All cases
The median period of time from the day of the murder to the day of indictment
(for those who were indicted) was just under 2 months and the mean was 4
months. Time to final disposition Final disposition is the date the case was
either rejected by the prosecutor (or dismissed in court), acquitted or
convicted at trial, or concluded through a guilty plea. All cases Median elapsed time from the day of the
murder to the day the case was finally disposed was 9 months. The mean was almost 1 year. Trials versus pleas Median disposition time from the day of the
murder to final disposition was 8 1/2
months for plea cases and 1 year for trial cases. Mean disposition time was 1 year for plea
cases and 1 year and 2 months for trial cases. Jury versus bench trials Cases disposed by bench trial (elapsed time
of about 13 months) were not disposed of significantly faster than those
disposed by jury trial (elapsed time of about 15 months). Jury trials For husbands tried by a jury, average
elapsed time from the day of the murder to the conclusion of the trial was
about 12 1/2 months; for wives it was significantly longer, about 18 1/2 months. ************************************************ Though wives were about as likely as
husbands to be charged with first-degree murder and about as likely to be
prosecuted or indicted, in other respects the justice system treated wives
less severely than husbands. Most notably-- Wives had a lower conviction rate than
husbands-- *70% of wives but 87% of husbands were
convicted of killing their mate. *At trial, judges and juries acquitted 31%
of wives but 6% of husbands. *Among cases tried before a jury, 27% of
wives were acquitted but none of the husbands. Convicted wives were less likely than
convicted husbands to be sentenced to prison, and convicted wives received
shorter prison sentences than their male counterparts-- *81% of convicted wives but 94% of
convicted husbands received a prison sentence. *Excluding life or death sentences, the
average prison sentence for killing a spouse was 6 years for wives but 16
1/2 years for husbands. *Among wives sentenced to prison, 15%
received a sentence of 20 years or more; among husbands, 43%. The likelihood of a spouse murder
defendant ultimately being convicted and sent to prison was lower for wives
than husbands-- *Of the 222 wife defendants, 57% ended
up in prison. Of the 318 husband defendants, 81% were sentenced to prison. Self-defense as a possible explanation
for wives' lower conviction rates In some cases the wife or the husband
killed the spouse only after being physically attacked or threatened with a
weapon by the spouse. In such cases
the defendant may claim self-defense.
Justice system officials then decide whether and to what extent the
victim's own conduct contributed to his/her death. Additionally, officials consider whether
the defendant could have fled the scene rather than stay and defend
him/herself and whether the defendant could have used less than lethal
force. In certain cases of extreme
victim provocation, where the homicide is ultimately determined to have been
justifiable, the prosecutor declines to prosecute, the grand jury votes not
to indict, or the judge or jury acquits the defendant. In less extreme cases the charge or
conviction offense is lowered. The possibility investigated below is
that wives were less likely to have been convicted than husbands because wife
defendants were morelikely than husband defendants to have been severely
provoked by their spouse and therefore more likely to have been absolved on
grounds of self-defense. Grounds for claiming self-defense more
often present in wife defendant cases than in husband defendant cases Possible evidence to support a self-defense
claim--evidence that,somewhere along the chain of events leading to the
murder, the victim provoked the defendant--was more often present when wives
killed their husband than when husbands killed their wife-- *More wives (44%) than husbands (10%) had
been assaulted by their spouse (threatened with a weapon or physically
assaulted) at or around the time of the murder. (In some cases the survey
questionnaire did not indicate that the defendant had been provoked, but the
case narrative clearly revealed provocation. In such instances the defendant
was classified as provoked.) *More wives (58%) than husbands (10%)
had been assaulted by their spouse at the time of the murder or in the
past. Consistent with that, more wives
(51%) than husbands (12%) had killed a spouse who had at least one prior
arrest or conviction (not necessarily an arrest or conviction for a crime
against the defendant, though). The possibility that more wife
defendants than husband defendants killed in self-defense is further supported
by two victim differences, though neither difference is statistically
significant-- *Situations in which the victim is armed
are probably more characteristic of provoked than unprovoked murders. If more wife defendant than husband
defendant cases involved an armed victim, that would tend to corroborate
other evidence suggesting that more wife than husband defendants were
provoked. Of relevance, then, is the
fact that the victim was armed in 21% of wife defendant cases but 11% of
husband defendant cases. *Previous research has shown that,
compared to unprovoked murders, provoked spouse murders tend more often to
involve alcohol use by the victim. One
additional check of whether more wife defendants than husband defendants were
provoked is to compare the two in terms of victim alcohol use. They should differ, with victim alcohol use
being more prevalent in wife defendant than husband defendant cases. Relevant to the question of provocation,
then, is the fact that the victim had been the only one drinking in 25% of
cases where the wife killed the husband. That compares to just 4% of husband
defendant cases, where the wife had been the only one drinking. Victim provocation reduces likelihood of
conviction Victim provocation (meaning that
thedefendant was apparently assaulted or threatened with a weapon by the
victim at or around the time of the homicide) appeared to reduce the
likelihood of conviction-- *Of the provoked wives, 56% were
convicted. (No conviction rate is given for provoked husbands because there
were too few cases for a reliable estimate.
Also, cases used to investigate the effect of provocation on
sentencing excluded cases where provocation was unknown. Consequently, average
sentences in this section may differ from averages shown elsewhere). That is
lower than either the 86% for unprovoked wives or the 88% of unprovoked
husbands. No difference between provoked and
unprovoked wives in terms of likelihood of receiving a prison sentence or
length of prison sentence Risk of conviction is lower for provoked
than unprovoked defendants. But if convicted, the provoked defendant
gets no obvious break at sentencing-- *84% of convicted wife defendants were
sent to prison, whether or not they were provoked. *The average prison sentence was 5 years
for provoked wife defendants and 7 years for unprovoked wife defendants, but
the difference was not statistically significant. These results do not necessarily mean,
however, that the justice system disregards victim provocation at
sentencing. Following are three
alternate, but not mutually exclusive, interpretations of why the average
sentence lengths do not differ between wives who killed their husband upon
provocation and those who were not provoked. Victim provocation indirectly mitigates
the sentence through reduced charges To illustrate, the prosecutor takes
provocation into account by agreeing to a plea to a reduced charge. The sentence the provoked wife receives is
less severe than what she would have received had the prosecutor not made
allowance for provocation. Similarly,
the judge or jury takes provocation into account by convicting the wife
defendant of a lower charge. Again,
the result is a less severe sentence than what she otherwise would have
received. Such indirect mitigation is
not necessarily observable when sentences are compared betweenprovoked and
unprovoked defendants. Despite provoked wives' testimony that
they had been assaulted, their testimony in some cases was insufficient to
convince prosecutors, judges, or juries. Perhaps their claim was
uncorroborated. Unsupported defendant
testimony is generally less persuasive than eyewitness testimony, physical
signs of abuse on the defendant, or documentary evidence from hospital or
legal records of past abuse by the victim.
Another possibility is that prosecutors, judges, or juries believed
provocation had occurred but also believed that the defendant could have fled
the scene or, even if that was not possible, did not have to resort to lethal
force. The small sample size is a reason the
5-year sentence for provoked wives is not significantly shorter than the
7-year sentence for unprovoked wives. With a larger sample, the 2-year
difference would be statistically significant. No explanation for why State prison
sentences were, on average, 10 years shorter for wife defendants thanhusband
defendants *The average prison sentence for
convicted wife defendants was 6 years, or about 10 years shorter than the
average 16.5 years for husband defendants. More spouse killings by wives than
husbands were mitigated by victim provocation, and wives received shorter
sentences than husbands, but attributing wives' shorter sentences to this one
particular mitigating factor is not necessarily justified. Wife and husband
defendants differed on factors besides provocation that might explain the
10-year difference. Moreover, the 10-year disparity persists even when the
comparison is restricted to defendants who were alike in terms of whether
they were provoked-- *The average prison sentence for
unprovoked wife defendants was 7 years, or 10 years shorter than the average
17 years for unprovoked husband defendants.
(It would also be desirable to compare sentence lengths between provoked
husbands and provoked wives. That
comparison was not made because too few husband defendants were provoked to
form the basis for a reliable comparison.) Further reading Key findings reported here correspond
closely to what Professor Marvin Wolfgang found four decades ago in his
classic study of the justice system's handling of homicides in Philadelphia
from 1948 to 1952. Comparing outcomes between spouse murder defendants,
Wolfgang reported these apparent disparities (See Patterns in Criminal
Homicide [Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1958] p. 217)-- *a higher proportion of husbands (64%)
than wives (55%) were found guilty; *a higher proportion of wives (34%) than
husbands (4%) were acquitted; *husbands were convicted of more serious
degrees of homicide than were wives. No firm explanation for the disparities
was offered, but Wolfgang did suggest that they might largely be explained by
differences between defendants in terms of victim provocation. Sixty percent of wife defendants were
strongly provoked by their mate, compared to 10% of husband defendants. ****************************** The race of the murder victim was known
in 529 of the 540 cases. Of the 529
total, the victim was black in 292 cases--or 55%--and white in 225--or
43%. Other races (Asian, American
Indian, Pacific Islander, or Alaska Native) made up the balance of the 529. Conviction rate unrelated to race of
victim The likelihood of a defendant being
convicted of spouse murder was about the same whether the murder victim was
white or black-- *The defendant was convicted in 81% of
cases where the spouse murder victim was white, not significantly different
from the 79% of cases where the victim was black. Sentence unrelated to race of victim The likelihood of a convicted spouse
murderer receiving a prison sentence was about the same whether the murder
victim was white or black-- *The convicted spouse murderer was
sentenced to prison in 93% of cases where the victim was white, not
significantly different from the 87% of cases where the victim was black. The length of the prison sentence
imposed on a convicted spouse murderer was generally unrelated to whether the
murder victim was white or black (sentences for negligent manslaughter are
not compared because they are based on too few cases to be considered
statistically reliable)-- *For conviction for first-degree murder,
the average prison term (excluding life and death sentences) was 29 years in
white-victim cases, not significantly different from the 32 years in
black-victim cases. *For conviction for second-degree
murder, the average prison term (excluding life sentences) was 19 years in
white-victim cases, significantly longer than the 13 years in black-victim
cases. However, 23% of convicted
second-degree murder defendants in black-victim cases received a sentence of
life imprisonment, compared to 8% of defendants in white-victim cases. *For conviction for nonnegligent
manslaughter, the average prison term (excluding life sentences) was 8 years
in white-victim cases, not significantly different from the average 6 years
in black-victim cases. Race of defendant also unrelated to
outcomes Virtually all--97%--of spouse murders
were intraracial. When a white was
murdered by a spouse, the likelihood was about 97% that the alleged murderer
was white. When the spouse murder
victim was black, the likelihood was 97% that the alleged murderer was also
black. Given the highly intraracial
nature of spouse murder, statistics relating the victim's race to specific
outcomes are interchangeable with those relating the defendant's race to
outcome. The overall conclusion that the victim's
race is unrelated to outcome applies equally well to the defendant's
race. The likelihood of conviction,
and of a prison sentence if convicted, and the length of the prison sentence
were about the same whether the spouse murder defendant was white or black-- *78% percent of white defendants were
convicted, not significantly different from the 80% of black defendants. *Among convicted spouse murderers, 93%
of white defendants were sentenced to prison, not significantly different
from the 88% of black defendants. ******************** Sample selection The 33 counties in the sample were
selected to be representative of the Nation's 75 largest counties. The ranking of counties in which the 75
largest were identified was based on a combination of crime data (1980 and
1984 Uniform Crime Report Part I arrests) and population data (1980
population from the Census Bureau's City County Data Book). Rankings reflected the size of the
prosecutors' offices. The original
sample plan identified 34 counties, 1 of which declined to participate. The following are the 33 counties whose
prosecutors' offices participated in the study reported here-- Arizona:
Pima A total of 2,539 murder cases were
sampled. These cases were a sample of
about half of all murder-charge cases disposed of in the sampled 33 counties
in 1988. Not eligible for sample
selection were nonmurder defendants or any whose most serious charge was
attempted murder, negligent or involuntary manslaughter, or vehicular
homicide. In counties with 200 or
fewer disposed murder cases in 1988, all were selected for inclusion in the
sample. In counties with more than
200, a systematic sample of 200 was chosen.
Only 6 of the 33 counties had more than 200 murder cases. Virtually all cases meeting the
1988-disposition criterion were disposed for all defendants in the case. Of the 3,119 defendants on whom data were
obtained, only 13 had not yet had their cases adjudicated at the time the
survey was carried out in 1990.
Another 25 defendants had died of suicide or other causes, either at
about the time of the murder or later, before final disposition. Sample of spouse murder defendants Of the 3,119 sampled murder defendants,
187 were spouse murder defendants. The
187 consist of 111 husband defendants and 76 wife defendants. Extrapolating to the 75 largest counties,
the 187 represent an estimated 540 spouse murder defendants. The figure 540, then, is based on a sample
size approximately one-third of 540.
Readers wishing to determine for themselves the approximate sample
size on which any of the report's statistics are based need only to multiply
the table estimate by one-third. Nonavailability of cases The survey goal to track murder cases
across justice system stages was not met in nine counties. In one of the nine, legal restrictions
barred access to cases rejected by the prosecutor. In the remaining eight counties, some of
the sampled cases could not be located. Computation of estimates from sample
data Case weights were applied to statistics
on the sampled cases to form estimates for the universe of the 75 largest
counties, the key assumption being that cases not sampled were similar to the
cases sampled. A case weight was the
inverse of the probability that a case would be in the survey. That probability was the product of both
the probability that a given county would be chosen and the probability of
selection of that case in that county.
Case weights were adjusted to compensate for the loss of one
nonparticipating county. Statistically weighted, the 3,119
defendants in the sample cases represented 9,576 murder defendants in the Nation's
75 largest counties. Response rates Except as noted below, this report
focused exclusively on characteristics that were successfully obtained in a
high percentage of sample cases ("response rate"). The case records identified age, race,
sex, and ethnicity for nearly all defendants (approximately 98%). Also obtained in nearly all cases were
the relationships between victims and defendants; the circumstances preceding
the homicide; the arrest or indictment charge; and whether the defendant was
convicted, and if so, the conviction offense.
In incarceration or probation cases, the length of the term of
sentence was usually known. Defendant criminal history was available
in three-quarters of the cases, but victim criminal history was obtained in
only a third of the cases. The
juvenile portion of the criminal history information was probably less
complete than the adult portion. Sampling error Data collected in this murder study were
from a probability sample rather than a complete enumeration. Because counties and cases were sampled, a
sampling error (standard error) is associated with each number in the
report. In general, if the difference
between two numbers is greater than twice the standard error for that
difference, there is at least 95% confidence that the two numbers are in fact
different; that is, the apparent difference is not simply the result of
surveying a sample rather than the entire population. Similarly, if the difference between two
numbers is greater than 1.6 standard errors, we are at least 90% confident
that the two numbers are different. In
this report the term "statistically significant" was used to denote
a difference in which there is at least 90% confidence. Except where explicitly indicated
otherwise, all differences discussed in this report had a confidence level at
or above 90% (virtually all were above 95%).
Standard error estimation was based on software that takes into
account the survey's sample design features. Limited data on provocation The report reaches no firm conclusion
about the possible impact of victim provocation on case outcomes, in part
because thorough analysis requires more cases and more details than are
available from this study's spouse murder database. For instance, the survey does not show-- *which defendants actually claimed
self-defense; *which of the spouses in each case was
the first to strike or threaten the other; *which defendants received a charge or
sentence reduction because prosecutors, judges, or juries decided victim
provocation was present (however, the survey did document instances where the
prosecutor screened out the case expressly because of victim provocation); *which claims of self-defense were
supported by strong evidence; *which defendants claiming self-defense
had the option of fleeing rather than using deadly force. |