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
*******************************
Contents
*******************************
Highlights
Survey of murder defendants
Characteristics of spouse murder defendants
Spouse murder cases disposed by the prosecutor
Spouse murder cases disposed by trial verdict
Spouse murder cases disposed by guilty plea
Overview of case disposition of spouse murder defendants
Sentencing of defendants convicted of killing their spouse
Processing time in spouse murder cases
Less severe dispositions for wife defendants:  Summary of evidence
Race in spouse murder cases
Methodology
*******************************
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.
Among wife defendants 61% were black and 39% were white.  In 97%
of the murders, both spouses were the same race.
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
*24% second-degree murder
* 6% nonnegligent manslaughter
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
(2) the defendant pleaded not guilty, stood trial, and was either acquitted
or convicted; or
(3) the defendant pleaded guilty.
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--
*81% of convicted wives but 94% of convicted husbands received a
prison sentence.
*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.
********************************
Survey of murder defendants
*******************************
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).
*********************************************
Characteristics of spouse murder defendants
*********************************************
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%
*second-degree murder:  24%
*nonnegligent manslaughter:  6%
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.)
***********************************************
Spouse murder cases disposed by the prosecutor
***********************************************
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).
******************************************
Spouse murder defendants who stood trial:
Trial acquittals
*******************************************
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.
*************************************************************
Spouse murder defendants who stood trial: Trial convictions
*************************************************************
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.
**********************************************
Spouse murder cases disposed by guilty plea
**********************************************
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.
*********************************************
Spouse murder defendants who pleaded guilty
*********************************************
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).
**********************************************************
Overview of case disposition of spouse murder defendents
**********************************************************
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%
*Pleaded guilty:  43%
*Convicted at trial: 37%
*Acquitted at trial:  7%
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.
*************************************************************
Sentencing of defendants convicted of killing their spouse
************************************************************
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.
*****************************************
Processing time in spouse murder cases
*****************************************
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.
************************************************
Less severe dispositions for wife defendants:
Summary of evidence
************************************************
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.
******************************
Race in spouse murder cases
******************************
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.
********************
Methodology
********************
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
California:  Los Angeles, Orange, Kern, San Diego, Riverside
Colorado:  Denver, Arapahoe
Connecticut: New Haven
Florida:  Dade, Orange, Broward
Illinois:  Cook
Louisiana:  Orleans
Maryland:  Prince George's
Massachusetts:  Middlesex
Michigan:  Wayne
Missouri:  St. Louis
New Mexico:  Bernalillo
New York:  Kings, Monroe, New York, Queens
Ohio: Franklin, Montgomery
Oklahoma:  Oklahoma
Pennsylvania:  Philadelphia, Allegheny
Tennessee:  Shelby
Texas:  Dallas, Tarrant, Travis
Washington:  King
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.
(END OF FILE)
Owning Topic : T=Reference and Statistics - 202 E= 1764 Type = e