Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: A large part of the sentencing reforms of the past 30 years has been the move to essentially mandatory sentencing guidelines. Many have begun to study the impact of the 1987 implementation of the federal sentencing guidelines. However, most researchers have viewed the judge as the sole criminal justice decision-maker when measuring sentencing outcomes. This work directs attention to the federal prosecutor. In a secondary analysis of multi-year, multi-district data collected by Spohn (2006), this exploratory study investigates prosecutorial discretion under the federal sentencing guidelines. Foci are placed upon the prosecutor’s decision to file a substantial assistance motion reduction, the magnitude of that reduction, and the prosecutor’s decision to file “notice” of prior felony drug convictions, which trigger “three strikes” federal statutes. Analyses revealed that variables of gender and non-citizenship predicted the likelihood of the federal prosecutor filing substantial assistance motions, while gender and district of conviction were statistically significant predictors of the magnitude of that substantial assistance reduction. Furthermore, 64% of offenders who were eligible to be noticed on all prior felony drug convictions were not. Additionally, unemployment and district of conviction affected the prosecutor’s decision to file notice of prior felony drug charges, but no legal variables were found to be statistically significant with respect to the prosecutor’s decision to file this notice. This paper points out the need to further conceptualize federal prosecutorial discretion, especially under guideline sentencing.

Publication Type: Proceeding

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: According to CIA Director Porter Goss, for more than 20 years now the practice of so-called extraordinary rendition has been used in dealing with foreign national suspected of involvement in international terror. In essence what is involved is that agents of the US government will apprehend an alleged terror suspect either on American soil or on the territory of another state of which the suspect is not a citizen. Using unmarked planes the CIA will then transfer the terror suspect to a third country. Typically, but not always, the suspect is sent to his native country. While the US government claims this is an efficient, productive and fair strategy for dealing with dangerous suspects, critics allege the policies often violate the laws of the country in which the suspects are apprehended and lead frequently to human rights violations, when the receiving countries use varied forms of torture to extract confessions and information. This case will examine the morality, legality, and effectiveness of extraordinary rendition as a tool in the war on terror. It will pay particular attention to a European perspective on the case of the alleged 2003 abduction of Egyptian cleric Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, also known as Abu Omar, who was taken from streets of Milan, Italy and flown to his native Egypt for interrogation. The case study will eventually be submitted for consideration for publication by the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The paper is aimed at description and analysis of some obstacles and problems concerning elaboration among cities and regions of European countries a common methodological background in order to foster an exchange of social policy ideas, directions of these policies, and rehabilitation programmes. The paper is based on experiences of one and half year implementation of the “Cities Against Social Exclusion” EU Project (Interrreg III C East Zone).

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Gay men belong to a stigmatized social group for whom many negative attitudes and stereotypes exist, including the stereotype that gay men are likely to be child molesters. We explored the implications of this stereotype for judgments made in a legal case involving child sexual abuse accusations against a male teacher. Jurors who held the most anti-gay attitudes and those who endorse the stereotype of gay men as child molesters made the most pro-prosecution judgments in cases involving gay, but not straight, defendants.