View
215
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Llad Phillips 1
Is Criminal Justice Just?Is Criminal Justice Just?
Llad Phillips 2
OutlineOutline
The Cost of the Criminal Justice SystemThe Cost of the Criminal Justice System Equity and JusticeEquity and Justice
Llad Phillips 3
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/jeeus01.htm
Llad Phillips 4
The number of CJS employees almost doubled, 82-01
Llad Phillips 5
Corrections Outstrips Judicial
Llad Phillips 6
Nominal Dollars
Llad Phillips 7
Llad Phillips 8
Llad Phillips 9
Llad Phillips 10
Llad Phillips 11
1992: Cost of Control: $93.8 Billion1993: Victim Losses: $21.5 B + $72.9 B = $94.4B ( Impact of Crime On Society lecture)Total = $188.2 Billion
Llad Phillips 12
Cost to Victims in US, 1993Cost to Victims in US, 1993Offense Loss Rate Reported
OffensesDamages,Billions $
Robbery $13,000 659,757 $8.6
AutoTheft
$4,000 1,561,047 $6.2
Burglary $1,500 2,834,808 $4.3
Larceny $370 7,820,909 $2.4
Total $21.5
Source: National Institute of Justice, Victim Costs and Consequences (1996)
Llad Phillips 13
Damages: US Violence, 1993Damages: US Violence, 1993
Offense Loss Rate ReportedOffenses
Damages,Billions, $
Homicide $1,191,000 24,526 $46.8
Rape $87,000 104,806 $9.1
Assault $15,000 1,135,099 $17.0
Total $72.9
Source: National Institute of Justice, Victim Costs and Consequences (1996)
Llad Phillips 14
Total Cost ($188 B) = victim losses($94B) + Control Costs($94 B)Slope = -1
Crime Control Technology: loss rate*OF where OF = f(TC,SE)
TC = $188 B, 92-93
Control Costs
VictimCosts
$94 B
$94B
450
Total Cost ($188 B) = victim losses($94B) + Control Costs($94 B)Slope = -1
Crime Control Technology: loss rate*OF where OF = f(TC,SE)
If CJS were efficient, then Crime Control Technology would be:
TC = $188 B
Control Costs
VictimCosts
$94 B
$94B
CCT
Llad Phillips 16
Is the US Criminal Justice System Efficient?
Is the US Criminal Justice System Efficient?
If you believe US policies are correct then the If you believe US policies are correct then the previous slide may represent 1992-93previous slide may represent 1992-93
If you think the war on drugs is wasteful, thenIf you think the war on drugs is wasteful, then
There are inefficiencies There are inefficiencies
Llad Phillips 17
Policy OptionsPolicy Options
House arrest for possession of drugsHouse arrest for possession of drugs Save corrections costs: 1/3 state corrections and Save corrections costs: 1/3 state corrections and
6/10 federal = 6.81 + 1.59 = $8.4 B6/10 federal = 6.81 + 1.59 = $8.4 B DecriminalizationDecriminalization
Save federal and some local enforcement and Save federal and some local enforcement and local judicial costs as well: fed enforcement in 92: local judicial costs as well: fed enforcement in 92: 0.6*$17.4B= $10.4 B, 3/10 * ($29.659 + $10.052) 0.6*$17.4B= $10.4 B, 3/10 * ($29.659 + $10.052) = $ B 11.9, for a total additional $22.3 B= $ B 11.9, for a total additional $22.3 B
Llad Phillips 18
Llad Phillips 19
State PrisonersState Prisoners Federal Prisons:Federal Prisons:
In 1996, Drug OffendersIn 1996, Drug Offenders accounted for 60% ofaccounted for 60% ofFederal PrisonersFederal Prisoners
Federal Spending on Drug ControlFederal Spending on Drug Control19811981 $1.5 Billion$1.5 Billion19891989 $6.7 “$6.7 “19901990 $9.8 “$9.8 “19951995 $13.0 “$13.0 “20002000 $17.9 “$17.9 “20012001 $18.1”$18.1”
Total Cost ($158 B) = victim losses($94B) + Control Costs($64 B)Slope = -1
Crime Control Technology: loss rate*OF where OF = f(TC,SE)
If CJS were efficient, then possible to save $ 30 B, and Crime Control Technology would be different since OF redefined (no drugs)
TC = $188 B
Control Costs
VictimCosts
$94 B
$64B
CCT
TC = $158 B
Llad Phillips 21
Is Criminal Justice Just?Is Criminal Justice Just?
Llad Phillips 22
Los Angeles TimesLos Angeles Times
Wednesday, November 10, 1999-p. A1Wednesday, November 10, 1999-p. A1 ““Garcetti Seeks to Overturn 4 Cases Tainted by Garcetti Seeks to Overturn 4 Cases Tainted by
LAPD”`LAPD”` Thursday, November 11, 1999- p. A1Thursday, November 11, 1999- p. A1
““Inmate Freed in LAPD Probe”Inmate Freed in LAPD Probe” LAPD Ramparts stationLAPD Ramparts station
• Officers Rafael Perez and Nino DurdenOfficers Rafael Perez and Nino Durden
Llad Phillips 23
Llad Phillips 24
U.S. News and World Report: 11-9-98U.S. News and World Report: 11-9-98 ““The Wrong Men on Death Row”The Wrong Men on Death Row” 3517 inmates on death row3517 inmates on death row since 1976, 486 executionssince 1976, 486 executions 75 known cases of persons wrongly 75 known cases of persons wrongly
condemned to diecondemned to die probability about 2 per 100probability about 2 per 100
States with mistakesStates with mistakes Florida: 19Florida: 19 Illinois: 9Illinois: 9 Texas: 7Texas: 7 Georgia: 6Georgia: 6
Llad Phillips 25
Gary Gaugher8 months
Rolando Cruz10 years
Perry Cobb8 years
Verneal Jimerson11 Years
Dennis Williams16 years
Llad Phillips 26
Are the risks of mistakes too high?Are the risks of mistakes too high?
Three factors in wrongful convictionsThree factors in wrongful convictions perjured testimonyperjured testimony faulty eyewitness identificationfaulty eyewitness identification false confessionsfalse confessions
# 1 reason for wrongful convictions# 1 reason for wrongful convictions incompetent legal representationincompetent legal representation
in 1996 Congress stopped funding legal aid in 1996 Congress stopped funding legal aid centers in 20 statescenters in 20 states
Llad Phillips 27
Questions About CrimeQuestions About Crime
Are there Inequities by Income class?Are there Inequities by Income class? for victims?for victims?
Are there ethnic or racial injustices?Are there ethnic or racial injustices? for victims?for victims? for offenders?for offenders?
Variation by Region
Controlling for why it happens
Llad Phillips 33
Variation of Victimization with Class and IncomeVariation of Victimization with Class and Income The Distribution of IncomeThe Distribution of Income
California Income 1993California Income 1993 Number of tax returns by adjusted gross income Number of tax returns by adjusted gross income
(AGI) class(AGI) class
US IncomeUS Income
Llad Phillips 34
Average Annual Rate of Violent Victimizations Per 1000 FemalesAverage Annual Rate of Violent Victimizations Per 1000 FemalesFamily Income Total IntimateLess than $10,000 57 20$10,000 - $14,999 47 13$15,000 - $19,999 42 11$20,000 - $29,999 38 10$30,000 - $49,999 31 5$50,000 or more 25 5
Phillips’ Lecture 4
Victimization Rates by Income ClassVictimization Rates by Income Class
Source: Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice, Second edition
California: Adjusted Gross Income, 1993 Tax Year .
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
0
20
00
40
00
60
00
80
00
10
00
0
12
00
0
14
00
0
16
00
0
18
00
0
20
00
0
22
00
0
24
00
0
26
00
0
28
00
0
30
00
0
Adjusted Gross Income .
Nu
mb
er
Source: California Statsitical Abstract
California: Number of Returns by Adjusted Gross Income, . Tax Year 1993
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
10
000
20
000
30
000
40
000
50
000
60
000
70
000
80
000
90
000
10
0000
Adjusted Gross Income .
Nu
mb
er
CA AGI, Frequency & Cumulative FrequencyCA AGI, Frequency & Cumulative FrequencyIncome Number Frequency Cumulative
< 10,000 2727672 22.86% 22.8610-20,000 2440167 20.45% 43.31 20-30,000 1802873 15.11% 58.42
30-40,000 1305679 10.94% 69.36 -50,000 997933 8.37% 77.73 -100,000 2107160 17.66% 95.39 -150,000 323390 2.71% 98.10 -200,000 102863 0.86% 98.96 -300,000 70848 0.59% 99.55 -400,000 23982 0.20% 99.75 -500,000 11661 0.10% 99.85
-1,000,000 17172 0.14% 99.99
Distribution of Adjusted Gross Income, California .
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.250
10
00
0
20
00
0
30
00
0
40
00
0
50
00
0
60
00
0
70
00
0
80
00
0
90
00
0
10
00
00
Income
Fre
qu
en
cy
Llad Phillips 40
US Family Income 1995US Family Income 1995
Income Group Average Income
Lowest 20 % $ 8032
Second 20% $ 17916
Third 20% $ 28965
Fourth 20% $ 43930
Highest 20% $ 73058
Benchmark: Frequency Distribution for Equal .
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000
Income
Fre
qu
en
cy
% Population % Income0 0
20 2040 4060 6080 80100 100
Equal Distribution of Income
Lorenz Curve: Equal Distribution of Income .
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
% Population
% Incom
e
Benchmark: Frequency Distribution for Uniform .
0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.009
0.01
0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000
Income
Fre
qu
en
cy
% Population % Income0 0
20 440 1660 3680 64100 100
Uniform Distribution of Income
Lorenz Curves: Equal and Uniform Distributions .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Population
% I
nco
me
Equal
Uniform
% Families % Income0 0
20 4.240 14.260 29.980 53.295 79.9100 100
US Family Income, 1994
Lorenz Curve: United States Families, 1994 .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Families
% I
nco
me
Equal
Uniform
Family
Source: US Statistical Abstract
Llad Phillips 46
Figure . Lorenz Curve and Gini Index=Pink Area/0.5
Equal:Gini = 0Unequal: Gini =1
Llad Phillips 47
US Household Income Gini Index, 1972-2003
0.39
0.4
0.41
0.42
0.43
0.44
0.45
0.46
0.47
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
Gin
i In
dex
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h04.html
Llad Phillips 48
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Gini_supplement.html
Households includes singles and unrelateds
Llad Phillips 49
Why is Income Distributed So Unevenly?Why is Income Distributed So Unevenly? Labor Income is Unevenly DistributedLabor Income is Unevenly Distributed Part-time workPart-time work
less than 50 weeks per yearless than 50 weeks per year less than 36 hours per weekless than 36 hours per week
Lorenz Curves: US Famiy Income, 1970, 1980, 1994 . .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Families
% I
nco
me
1970
1980
1994
US Family Income: Lorenz Curves .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Population Percent
Inco
me P
erc
en
t
1970
1980
1994
1999
Trends in Shares of US Family Income .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
Year
Perc
en
t
Top 5 %
Top 20 %
Bottom 40%
Trends In US Median Family Income, 1994 $ .
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Year
19
94
$
Victimization Rates by Income ClassVictimization Rates by Income Class
Income Class Burglary Rate* RobberyRate†
-$7500 86 97,500-9,999 60 7
10,000-14,999 67 515,000-24,999 59 525,000-29,999 54 530,000-49,999 58 4
50,000- 56 3 * Per 1000 Households † Per 1,000 Persons
Source: Report to the Nation on Crime and Justice, Second edition
Lorenz Curves For Robbery and Burglary Victims .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Families
% V
icti
ms
Burglary
Robbery
Equal
HValue
Crime
%Zoned
Crime
Housing Value
% Zoned forLots > 25,000 Sq. Ft.
Census Tracts in Towns in the Boston Area
Public Goods and Private GoodsPublic Goods and Private Goods
Private GoodsPrivate Goods consumption uses them upconsumption uses them up
what you eat is not available to nourish otherswhat you eat is not available to nourish others
Public GoodsPublic Goods consumption does not use them upconsumption does not use them up
national defensenational defense safe streetssafe streets educated citizenryeducated citizenry
PublicGoods
Private Goods
Optimal Mix
Too Few Public Goods
Slope of the Production PossibilityFrontier:Marginal Cost of Public Goods÷ Marginal Cost of Private Goods
How Much Government Should There Be?What is the right mix of public goods and private goods?
Llad Phillips 59
Poverty in the USPoverty in the US US Government Definition of PovertyUS Government Definition of Poverty
Subsistence wage: $17603 in 2000Subsistence wage: $17603 in 2000 a non-farm family of foura non-farm family of four cost of inexpensive but nutritious food times 3cost of inexpensive but nutritious food times 3
• assume food is 1/3 of budgetassume food is 1/3 of budget
Trends in PovertyTrends in Poverty Incidence of PovertyIncidence of Poverty
elderlyelderly children/families headed by single womenchildren/families headed by single women ruralrural
Llad Phillips 60
Poverty in the United StatesPoverty in the United States
Economic IssuesEconomic Issues Political IssuesPolitical Issues Social IssuesSocial Issues
changing behaviorschanging behaviors marriage trendsmarriage trends divorce trendsdivorce trends births out of wedlockbirths out of wedlock
Llad Phillips 61
Poverty Trends: 1959-2000
US Census Bureau: Poverty in the United States: 2000
Llad Phillips 62
Poverty and Female Heads of Households
US Census Bureau: Poverty in the United States: 2000
Llad Phillips 63
Poverty and Youth
Lab 10: Children, Poverty, and Politics
Llad Phillips 64
Child Poverty
Poverty in the States ….”
Llad Phillips 65
Llad Phillips 66
US Families Headed By Women in Percent .
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1940 1950 1960 1970 1983
Year
Perc
en
t
White
Black
Llad Phillips 67
US Marrige Rates Per 1000 Population, . Unmarried Women 15-44 Years Old
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
Year
Rate
Llad Phillips 68
Wall Street Journal, Feb. 5, 1996Wall Street Journal, Feb. 5, 1996 Population as a WholePopulation as a Whole
Blacks: 12%Blacks: 12% Drug UsersDrug Users
Blacks: 13%Blacks: 13% Arrested for Drug PossessionArrested for Drug Possession
Blacks: 35%Blacks: 35% Conviction for Drug PossessionConviction for Drug Possession
Blacks: 59%Blacks: 59% Prison SentencePrison Sentence
Blacks: 74 %Blacks: 74 %
Llad Phillips 69
Racial Equity in SentencingRacial Equity in Sentencing
Stephen P. Klein, Susan Turner, Stephen P. Klein, Susan Turner,
Joan PetersiliaJoan Petersilia
Rand Study, Feb. 1988Rand Study, Feb. 1988
Llad Phillips 70
Llad Phillips 71
Llad Phillips 72
Llad Phillips 73
Llad Phillips 74
Llad Phillips 75
Llad Phillips 76
Llad Phillips 77
Llad Phillips 78
Business cycles and Racial Disparities in Punishment
Business cycles and Racial Disparities in Punishment
Samuel L. Myers and William SabolSamuel L. Myers and William Sabol
Contemporary Policy IssuesContemporary Policy Issues
October 1987October 1987
Llad Phillips 79
Llad Phillips 80
Llad Phillips 81
Llad Phillips 82
Llad Phillips 83
Income Frequency Distributions: Equal, . Normal, Exponential (AGI), Uniform
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
0
60
00
12
00
0
18
00
0
24
00
0
30
00
0
36
00
0
42
00
0
48
00
0
54
00
0
60
00
0
66
00
0
72
00
0
78
00
0
84
00
0
90
00
0
96
00
0
Income
Fre
qw
uen
cy Normal
Exponential
Equal
uniform
Cumulative Income Distributions: Equal, Normal, Exponential (AGI), Uniform
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0
60
00
12
00
0
18
00
0
24
00
0
30
00
0
36
00
0
42
00
0
48
00
0
54
00
0
60
00
0
66
00
0
72
00
0
78
00
0
84
00
0
90
00
0
96
00
0
Income
Pro
bab
ilit
y Exponential
Equal
uniform
normal
Recommended