Edgar W. Butler

Urban Violence and Residential Mobility

Abstract Data from a recently completed national longitudinal survey suggest, contrary to popular expectations, that individual perceptions of local violence have at best only a very moderate influence on significant changes in residential location, that concern with crime problems does not seem to result in a major exodus to the suburbs, and that what little effect urban crime has on mobility is stronger for the poor and black than for high and middle income whites. The findings are interpreted to indicate that those groups who are most affected by crime and violence, the poor and the black, are precisely those groups least able to escape the problem through residential relocation.

Where Did Black Jurors Go? A Theoretical Synthesis of Racial Disenfranchisement in the Jury System and Jury Selection

The jury system evolved as an essential ingredient of Americas judicial framework. In recent years, however, frailties of the jury system in respect to its lack of fairness for women, Blacks, Latinos, and the poor have increasingly become the center of controversy. Federal law is clear that these groups have the right to participate in court as jurors, according to two key concepts: There must be a random selection of jurors, and it must be representative within specified geographic districts wherein a particular court convenes (U.S. 90th Congress House Report, 1968: Section 1961 ). The logic is that qualified residents of a given geographic domain should be part of the pool from which a jury is selected -- on the basis of a chance-opportunity for each to serve on a jury panel. Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have held that any substantial violation of these basic requirements of representativeness in jury selection is a prima facie case of discrimination (Alker & Barnard, 1978; Fukurai & Butler, 1987; Fukarai, Butler, & Krooth, in press; Horowitz, 1980).Challenges concerned with the underrepresentation of minorities have been brought claiming violation of the Sixth Amendment, which requires a representative jury selection from a fair cross-section of the community (Burns, 1987; Jalee, 1968). Yet, the lack of a fair cross-section has been shown in a variety of cases. Careful research indicates that discrimination in jury selection procedures occurs by gender, age, race, and socioeconomic status (Carp, 1982, pp. 257-277; Chevigny, 1975, pp. 157-172; Diamond, 1980, pp. 85-117; Fukurai, Butler, & Huebner-Dimitrius, 1987; Fukurai,Butler, & Krooth, 1991).In terms of the race of em paneled juries, however, the literature deals almost exclusively with the surface phenomenon of the lack of adequate Black representation. Clearly more elaborate research on judicial disenfranchisement is needed to examine the social mechanisms that produce and maintain the subservient condition of Black people, women, and other U.S. citizens with Third World backgrounds. This is particularly important because there has been a paucity of research examining the impact of the social and structural mechanisms that historically have perpetuated the subordination of Blacks in the jury system and jury selection.The next section provides the theoretical synthesis to the problematique of judicial inequities in the jury system and jury selection by examining four specific determinants of disproportionate racial representation on juries: (a) racial discrimination in jury selection procedures, (b) socioeconomic barriers preventing full community participation by Blacks and other racial minorities, (c) judicial discrimination that allows racially demarcated jury representation, and (d) institutional racism and bureaucratic discrimination in perpetuating judicial inequality. The reminder of this article, then, demonstrates that there still exists a racially demarcated jury system that systematically discriminates against Blacks and their full jury participation.

TRACKING RESPONDENTS IN LONGITUDINAL SURVEYS: SOME PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Over the last fifteen years, there has been a tremendous increase in the number of follow-up and panel studies being undertaken, despite sharply rising interview costs (especially for longitudinal surveys) and the heightened sophistication and wariness of potential respondents. Given this increased interest and these potential problems, it seems appropriate to suggest a possible research strategy for ensuring successful follow-up of respondents in diachronic surveys. Crider et al. have done this in a recent issue of this journal.1 However, like many other researchers, they neglected an important phase of any strategy for panel designs. This research note is intended to serve as an addendum to the article by Crider et al. There is a certain body of information that it is helpful to have before the trackdown begins. In fact, one of the most helpful guidelines that can be suggested to a researcher contemplating a longitudinal study is that the best time to begin the execution of a panel design is even before the first-wave interviews have been administered. Even if one does not intend at T1 to conduct a panel interview, it is wise to collect some limited follow-up information if there is any chance that one may decide post facto to reinterview. In other words, it is recommended that all surveys be designed as though they were to be

Prediction of Residential Movement and Spatial Allocation

decision factors involved in residential movement 1 and residential choice, and how these dimensions are related to models of the residential development process. The discussion is based primarily on results from a national survey of residential preferences and moving behavior of 1,476 metropolitan households (see Butler et al., 1969; hereafter, references to this monograph are identified as NCHRP). Related to our discus-

Jury Selection Procedures

The starting point in jury selection is sending a jury summons, which calls prospective jurors to the courthouse. Yet relatively few eligible citizens are successful in finally entering the jury box. Before they reach the courthouse, most prospective jurors are screened out by a variety of legal and extralegal factors.

Sociologists in Action: The McMartin Sexual Abuse Case, Litigation, Justice, and Mass Hysteria

This paper describes our involvement as jury consultants in one of the most notorious criminal trials in history—the McMartin child-molestation trial in Los Angeles. The McMartin trial was the longest and costliest criminal trial in American history. The prosecution spent

Geographical distribution and variation in selected socioeconomic variables for municipios in six Mexican Border States, 1980

15 million and took nearly six years in making a criminal case against day-care workers, only to have the jurors declare them not guilty. The defendants in the McMartin trial were charged with molesting young children at a preschool in Manhattan Beach, Los Angeles County, California. In 1987, we had performed scientific defense voir dire jury selection to choose the most impartial jurors to try the two defendants, Raymond Buckey and Peggy Buckey McMartin. In performing scientific jury selection, both a community survey and pre-voir dire questionnaires served as an important empirical foundation to assess jurors’ attitudinal, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics to develop the effective juror profiles for the trial.

The Consequences of Intelligence Testing in the Public Schools Before and After Desegregation

The present study analyzes data on selected socioeconomic characteristics for the six states of Mexico on the U.S.-Mexico border utilizing data on the regions 272 municipios. A common definition of the Mexican borderlands, the one adopted in the present research, includes the six states of Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas (Beegle et al. 1960; Stoddard et al. 1983; and Reich 1984). On occasion, researchers have modified the definition to encompass a seven state region, including the above states plus Baja California Sur (Stoddard 1983). The present analysis differs from all previous studies except Beegle et al. (1960) by analyzing all Mexican borderlands municipios. The data are first presented with descriptive statistics and computer mapping. Then, relationships among variables are examined at both regional and state levels.

Atlas of Mexico.

Before and after school desegregation, black, chicano, and poor children are mote likely to be labeled as mentally retarded and be placed in programs for the educable retarded than are anglo or upper status children. Similarly, black, chicano, and poor children are less likely to be seen as physically handicapped. These findings are a result of the use of intelligence tests as the means by which children are labeled mentally retarded. IQ tests ought to be eliminated from the schools because of factors 1) intrinsic to the tests themselves, 2) characteristic of the testing process, 3) related to the societal and educational connotations that the test has, and 4), as seen in the data reported here, the “institutional racism” which is a consequence of their use.

An Analysis of Interstate Migration in Mexico: Impact of Origin and Destination States on Migration Patterns

This atlas is the result of a project to develop a database of the population of Mexico using data from many sources including the 1980 census and more recent official data as well as the World Fertility Survey. The first chapter presents information on population and urbanization including age distribution sex ratio and population density. The second chapter covers marriage fertility and family planning. Other chapters deal with migration; mortality and health; social characteristics including literacy educational status indigenous language religion and housing; the economy; the labor force occupations employment and income; and transportation and communication.