Lori A. Post
Institute for Children, Youth, and Families
Michigan State University

Christopher D. Maxwell
School of Criminal Justice
Michigan State University
 
Mandatory domestic violence arrest policies have led to increases in the number of assailants arrested, prosecuted, and referred to batterer intervention programs. However, there have also been increases in the number of cases being denied or dismissed. This has raised questions and frustrations concerning whether or not prosecutor’s offices are holding batterers accountable. This paper answers the following question: are domestic violence case dispositions a function of prosecutor’s office domestic violence caseloads?

Using a single case study design, data from a rural prosecutor’s office database (n=1458 cases) and key informant interviews (n=5) were used to build and test a series of simple system dynamics models (Richardson and Pugh, 1986) of prosecution disposition time series. Disposition functions were written in terms of (a) only caseload, (a) a combination of caseload and case attributes, and (c) only case attributes. The fit between each calibrated model and real data was then compared using Theil (1966) inequality statistics.

Theil (1966) inequality statistics revealed that models with dispositions formulated in terms of only caseload outperformed models with dispositions involving a case attribute term. That is, evidence was found in this rural county prosecutor’s database for the caseload pressure hypothesis.
The major implication for social work policy and practice in rural communities’ coordinated community responses to domestic violence is that better methods for managing domestic violence prosecutor’s office caseloads need to be developed in order to increase assailant accountability and referrals to batterer intervention programs.