http://cjr.sagepub.com Criminal Justice Review RSS feed -- current issue December 2009 Criminal Justice Review 0734-0168 http://cjr.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif http://cjr.sagepub.com http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/4/489?rss=1 There has long been debate on the appropriate method to collect valid and reliable data on gang member involvement in crime and delinquency. In general, research in this area is based on data from self-report surveys, qualitative field work, and official reports which have well-documented limitations. Given these limitations, triangulation of methods is important to fully understand the unique contribution of gang members to the problem of crime and delinquency. This article proposes an additional data source to study gang violence and enhance triangulation: The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which added a measure of the victim’s perception of the offender’s gang status in 1992. We highlight the advantages and disadvantages of using the NCVS for gang violence research and present a comparison of victimizations reportedly committed by gang and nongang perpetrators across situational, offender, and victim characteristics. Findings demonstrate promise for the use of victimization data in future gang research. Like Egley, Maxson, Miller, and Klein, we encourage the use of a ‘‘pluralistic approach’’ for the study of gangs and suggest that victimization data such as the NCVS be used to provide greater insight into gang crime.

]]> Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809338344 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 514 2009-12-01 489 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/4/515?rss=1 Second Amendment issues regarding the right to bear arms in the home have come into focus recently with the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Despite strong antigun sentiment in the wake of high-profile shootings, sweeping new castle doctrine legislation has passed in 23 states in the last 4 years. These laws effectively expand individuals’ right to defend their home and possessions with lethal force without the necessity to retreat. To date, there is little criminological research that examines the evolution of the modern castle doctrine legislation in the United States. The present article addresses this gap in the literature by offering a historical perspective on the legal etiology of the castle doctrine relating to self-defense and then analyzes existing and pending castle doctrine legislation through December 2008. A discussion of the legal and criminological implications of these statutes on public policy is offered.

]]> Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809332095 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 535 2009-12-01 515 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/4/536?rss=1 The U.S. Supreme Court’s Payne decision opening the door to victim impact testimony in capital cases generally, and to victim character evidence particularly, has been controversial. The issue is whether a murder victim’s character is relevant to the moral blameworthiness of the defendant. Several mock jury simulation studies have shown that such evidence does influence jury decisions imposing the death penalty. The current study took a different direction and examined the nature and extent of actual victim character testimony in samples of death penalty cases in three states. Data were derived from 14 transcripts of the penalty phase of trials in each of three states: California, New Jersey, and Texas, states with different political and legal climates. Content analysis revealed that there were numerous references to victims’ character in the form of positive personality traits, in addition to descriptions of the impact the crime had on the victims’ families and friends. Qualitative analysis revealed that many witnesses were allowed to use photos, videotapes, and other personal items to portray the victim’s life. What emerges from this inside view of practices in courtrooms is disturbing in that the evidence allowed seems to exceed Payne’s already meager limitations.

]]> Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809338559 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 552 2009-12-01 536 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/34/4/553?rss=1 Gottfredson and Hirschi’s self-control theory has been the subject of much debate and empirical testing. Although the theory was developed originally as an explanation for criminal offending, researchers recently have examined whether low self-control may increase the risk of criminal victimization. This study assesses the effects of low self-control on victimization and offending among the incarcerated. We utilize structural equation models to test the impact of low self-control on prison victimization and prison infractions based on a study involving 208 recently paroled inmates from a Midwestern state. The results indicate that risk taking is a significant predictor of prison victimization and temper is a significant predictor of infractions. We conclude that self-control theory is a potential predictor of prison infractions and victimization and that personality traits seen as generally criminogenic in the free world may have particular situational ramifications in prison.

]]> Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809332840 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 568 2009-12-01 553 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/569?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808326483 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 570 2009-12-01 569 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/570?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808328802 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 572 2009-12-01 570 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/572?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809332875 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 574 2009-12-01 572 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/574?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808325720 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 575 2009-12-01 574 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/575?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808329515 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 577 2009-12-01 575 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/577?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809332184 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 579 2009-12-01 577 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/579?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808326377 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 581 2009-12-01 579 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/581?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808328682 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 583 2009-12-01 581 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/583?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016808325621 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 585 2009-12-01 583 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/586?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809349776 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 601 2009-12-01 586 Articles http://cjr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/34/4/602?rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:43:58 PST info:doi/10.1177/0734016809351253 Georgia State University, College of Health and Human Sciences 4 34 602 2009-12-01 602 Articles