The Comparability in Sexual and Nonsexual Assault Case Treatment: Did Statute Change Meet the Objective?

Abstract

Change in rape statutes has abounded in recent years. One of the primary goals with such change has been to remove unique standards and requirements in rape laws so that discriminatory treatment of rape cases will be precluded. This article assesses whether or not the object of comparability in case treatment was realized by examining the (dis)similarities in the treatment of sexual and nonsexual assaults. Data were collected on these two types of assaults in a Michigan jurisdiction operating under model rape reform legislation. Case characteristics as well as case outcomes were compared. The chi-square and t-test analyses revealed differences as well as similarities. Differences were, for example, found in areas pertaining to evidence availability, victim credibility, and precipitation. Similarities were, however, observed in rates of warrant authorization/denial, plea bargaining, and dismissal, despite such elements as less available evidence in the Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) cases. Because both similarities and discrepancies in case treatment were found, it is concluded that the object of comparability was limitedly realized. Final comments offer directions for furthering the progress toward the more equitable handling of sexual assault crimes.