Bryan C. McCannon

Prosecutorial Retention: Signaling by Trial

We examine how retention motives affect prosecutor behavior under different evaluation criteria. In particular, we analyze how prosecutors of differing capabilities respond in choosing which cases to take to trial and which to plea bargain. We show how different criteria distort the mix of cases chosen for trial and that the direction of the distortion depends crucially on the evaluation tool used. Optimal evaluation metrics are derived that combine multiple signals of performance and are shown to achieve the first-best outcome.

Prosecutor Elections, Mistakes, and Appeals

Prosecutors under common‐law tradition exercise a significant amount of discretion in the criminal justice system. In the United States, the dominant form of accountability is that prosecutors must be reelected by the voters. Recent empirical work illustrates that election concerns open up the potential for distortion in the decision making of prosecutors. Specifically, it has been shown that prosecutors take more cases to trial and plea bargain less when running for reelection. Does this hawkish behavior of prosecutors lead to inaccuracies in the criminal justice system? A panel data set of appellate decisions in western New York is analyzed. It is shown that if the initial felony conviction takes place in the six months prior to a reelection and is appealed, the probability that the appellate court upholds the lower courts decision decreases by 5.1–7.1 percentage points. Additional investigation into the types of mistakes made is done. Thus, the popular election of prosecutors results in inaccurate sentences, wrongful convictions, and, consequently, successful appeals.

Public Outcry and Police Behavior

Abstract Numerous empirical studies have documented policing behavior and response to public opinion, social norms, changing laws, neighborhood context and a litany of other subject areas. What is missing from this literature is a general theoretical framework that explains the conflicting goals of properly applying the law and responding to social norms and the consequences of the law. We build a theoretical framework where law enforcement officials care about both reputation and performance. Outside evaluations assess the quality of the decision making of the officers, but can be influenced by strategic challenging of the sanctioning by the suspected violators. We first establish that reputational concerns can distort law enforcement, encouraging either over-enforcement or under-enforcement of the law, depending on the prior beliefs of violations and the observed signal. Introducing strategic challenging by the violator eliminates over-enforcement and allows for an even larger reduction in application of the law by less-skilled officers. Connections to empirical findings of distortions in law enforcement, along with an extension to deterrence are highlighted.

Trust, reciprocity, and a preference for economic freedom: experimental evidence

Do those who prefer economic freedom behave differently than those who prefer government intervention? Experiments of the Dictator and Trust games are studied. A survey elicits preference for private solutions to potential market failures. Trust and reciprocation are highest for those who score both high and low on the assessment. In the Dictator Game, there is a strong inverse relationship between ones preference for economic freedom and giving. Thus, the results can be interpreted as those with a strong preference for government intervention altruistically give, while those with a preference for economic freedom give primarily in response to wealth-generating investments.

Bargaining in the shadow of arbitration

Arbitration, as an alternative to litigation for contract disputes, reduces costs and time. While it has frequently been thought of as a substitute to pretrial bargaining and litigation, in fact, parties may be able to reach a settlement privately while engaged in the arbitration process. Consequently, the institutional design may influence the bargaining. We develop a theoretical model of pre-arbitration bargaining that is able to identify the impact of the institutional features on its success. A detailed data set from arbitration proceedings in Italy is analyzed. The exogenous heterogeneity in the composition of the panel of arbitrators allows us to illustrate its effect on bargaining. We show that the number of arbitrators used interacts with their experience and independence to reduce uncertainty and facilitate settlement.

Born for Finance? Experimental Evidence of the Impact of Finance Education

What impact does a finance education have on the behaviors of individuals? Experiments of an investment game are conducted where a wealth-creating investment decision is made. After it grows, the recipient selects how much to return. The econometric method used allows for a disentangling of the selection effects from learning. We show that finance students are both born and made. Those who choose to study finance do not necessarily make trusting investments or volunteer to return the proceeds, but the effect of the education is to reverse these behaviors promoting pro-social, trusting, and reciprocating choices that generate wealth.

Evidence of Marginal Deterrence: Kidnapping and Murder in Italy

Empirical evidence of the marginal deterrent effect is provided. Exploring a data set of kidnapping crimes in Italy between 1960 and 2012, changes in Italian policy regarding sanctions for kidnapping and their associated impact on murders is considered. Deaths associated with kidnappings increase in prevalence when the kidnapping sanction increased, causing a decrease in the marginal sanction for murder. Death rates reversed when enhanced sanctions for murder were later introduced.

Understanding Ransom Kidnappings and Their Duration

Abstract What factors drive the length of a kidnapping experience? A theoretical model is developed to conduct comparative statics. A unique data set covering all kidnappings for ransom in Sardinia between 1960 and 2010 is analyzed. Factors related to the ability to pay and cost of abduction matter. Policies aimed at deterring kidnapping have mixed effects on its duration.

Re-Election Concerns and the Failure of Plea Bargaining

In this note, we provide a new explanation for the “failure” of plea bargaining. We show in a model of asymmetric information that a public prosecutor facing re-election takes cases to the courtroom to signal quality even when her welfare (absent retention motivation) is always higher from plea bargaining.

Differentiating between First Offenses and Repeat Offenses

I present a model where a regulator monitors compliance with a policy by a population of individuals, some of whom repeatedly prefer to violate the policy while others occasionally want to experiment. I show that the regulator can use sanctions, contingent on past violations of the policy, to differentiate between the agents and improve welfare. As a result, a regulator prefers investing in enforcement rather than use maximal sanctions.