Samantha Jeffries

Sentencing Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Women in Western Australia's Higher Courts

This article presents results from an exploratory study seeking to examine the role of sentencing in the continuing overrepresentation of Indigenous women in Western Australias prisons. Sentencing data from Western Australias higher courts indicate that Indigenous women were less likely than non-Indigenous women to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment when appearing before the court for comparable offending behaviour and histories.

Homophobia, Heteronormativism and Hegemonic Masculinity: Male Same-Sex Intimate Violence from the Perspective of Brisbane Service Providers

Few studies have explored the problem of male same-sex intimate partner violence, especially in the context of Australia. Utilizing in-depth interviews with gay-friendly service providers in Brisbane, the research presented in this article sought to ascertain whether (a) intimate partner violence occurs in male same-sex intimate relationships, (b) if so, what form this violence takes, (c) what contextual triggers underpin this violence, (d) what barriers victims face in exiting abusive relationships and seeking support, and (e) what services are available and appropriate to the needs of men in violent intimate relationships with other men. Results suggest that the prevalence, types and contextual triggers of violence in male same-sex relationships parallel abuse in opposite-sex relationships. Heteronormativism, homophobia, and its close association with hegemonic masculinity, however, emerge as features unique to the male same-sex intimate partner violence experience.

Narratives of mitigation Sentencing Indigenous criminal defendants in South Australia’s higher courts

In their statistical analyses of higher court sentencing in South Australia, Jeffries and Bond (2009) found evidence that Indigenous offenders were treated more leniently than non-Indigenous offenders, when they appeared before the court under similar numerical circumstances. Using a sample of narratives for criminal defendants convicted in South Australia’s higher courts, the current article extends Jeffries and Bond’s (2009) prior statistical work by drawing on the ‘focal concerns’ approach to establish whether, and in what ways, Indigeneity comes to exert a mitigating influence over sentencing. Results show that the sentencing stories of Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders differed in ways that may have reduced assessments of blameworthiness and risk for Indigenous defendants. In addition, judges highlighted a number of Indigenous-specific constraints that potentially could result in imprisonment being construed as an overly harsh and costly sentence for Indigenous offenders.

Indigeneity and the likelihood of imprisonment in Queensland's adult and children's courts

Australian research on Indigenous sentencing disparities of the standard of international work is somewhat recent. Contrary to expectations based on international research, Australian studies generally have not found Indigenous offenders to be treated substantively more harshly than non-Indigenous offenders in similar circumstances. However, this research has primarily focused on adult higher courts, with little attention to lower courts and childrens courts. In this article, we examine whether Indigeneity has a direct impact on the judicial decision to incarcerate for three courts (adult higher, adult lower, childrens higher court) in Queensland. We found no significant differences in the likelihood of a sentence of incarceration in the higher courts (adult and childrens). In contrast, in the lower courts, Indigenous defendants were more likely to be imprisoned than non-Indigenous defendants when sentenced under statistically similar circumstances.

The Impact of Indigenous Status on Adult Sentencing: A Review of the Statistical Research Literature From the United States, Canada, and Australia

The gross overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in prison populations suggests that sentencing may be a discriminatory process. Using findings from recent (1991–2011) multivariate statistical sentencing analyses from the United States, Canada, and Australia, we review the 3 key hypotheses advanced as plausible explanations for baseline sentencing discrepancies between Indigenous and non-Indigenous adult criminal defendants: (a) differential involvement, (b) negative discrimination, and (c) positive discrimination. Overall, the prior research shows strong support for the differential involvement thesis and some support for the discrimination theses (positive and negative). We argue that where discrimination is found, it may be explained by the lack of a more complete set of control variables in researchers’ multivariate models and/or differing political and social contexts.

Why do they Keep Going Back? Exploring Women's Discursive Experiences of Intimate Partner Abuse

This paper explores how different discourses of intimate partner abuse (IPA) may impact womens decisions to stay or leave their partners. More specifically, we ask: 1) what narratives are available to and used by heterosexual and non-heterosexual female survivors of IPA to make sense of their experiences? 2) How might these narratives impact womens ability, or lack thereof, to disengage from their abusive partners? Prior literature suggests that there are four possible discourses on which women may draw including psychological (victim and offender), gendered political, and the narrative of romantic love. Analysis of discussion forums from online social networking sites revealed that while each of these discourses are utilised by women, scripts of romantic love may provide the strongest motivation for accepting and maintaining an abusive relationship. In contrast, understanding the psychological motivations of their abusers may empower female survivors to extricate themselves from the violence.

Harsher Sentences? Indigeneity and prison sentence length in Western Australia's higher courts

Overall, reviews of international sentencing research conclude that offenders’ race/ethnicity has a direct effect on sentencing outcomes. Although specific research on Indigenous status and sentencing is much more limited, there is emerging evidence that Indigeneity also has a direct impact on sentencing outcomes. While North American research suggests harsher outcomes, Australian research indicates more lenient outcomes at some stage of the process. The current study examines the effect of Indigenous status on the length of imprisonment decision in Western Australia’s higher courts. We found that Indigenous offenders receive shorter terms of imprisonment than non-Indigenous offenders in statistically similar circumstances. We argue that our findings are broadly consistent with focal concerns of blameworthiness, risk and practical concerns having an impact on decisions about length of term. However, Indigeneity does not evoke the same judicial perceptions of race as suggested by prior North American research.

Gender, Indigeneity, and the Criminal Courts: A Narrative Exploration of Women's Sentencing in Western Australia

Using the focal concerns perspective, this study extends C. Bond and S. Jeffriess (2010) past statistical sentencing research on Indigeneity and gender by undertaking a narrative exploration of sentencing transcripts. In contrast to statistical studies that have explored intersections between gender and race-ethnicity in North America, this Australia-based research suggests that gender does not bypass Indigenous (minority) female defendants. Rather, differences in the sentencing stories by Indigenous status appeared to reduce assessments of blameworthiness and risk for Indigenous female defendants. Furthermore, Indigenous women were viewed differently from non-Indigenous females in terms of social cost (i.e., practical constraints and consequences). These findings suggest a possible explanation for sentencing leniency being extended to Indigenous female defendants.

Analysing Trends in the Imprisonment of Women in Australia and New Zealand

As in the United States and many other Western nations, incarceration rates in Australia and New Zealand have risen significantly over the past two decades. An interesting aspect of this trend is that internationally, incarceration rates for females have increased faster than those for men. A number of researchers in the United States and the United Kingdom have attempted to explain this phenomenon. This article looks at two countries that are culturally similar and geographically close: Australia and New Zealand. Disproportionate rises in female prison populations are visible in these jurisdictions. Focussing on the 2001–2012 period, the reasons for the disproportionate rises in female incarceration rates are hypothesized and compared. It is suggested that while the drivers of the changes are in some cases similar, there are also some interesting differences between the two countries.

Protecting Australia's Children: A Cross-Jurisdictional Review of Domestic Violence Protection Order Legislation

Increasingly, domestic violence is being treated as a child protection issue, and children affected by domestic violence are recognised as experiencing a form of child abuse. Domestic violence protection order legislation – as a key legal response to domestic violence – may offer an important legal option for the protection of children affected by domestic violence. In this article, we consider the research that establishes domestic violence as a form of child abuse, and review the provisions of State and Territory domestic violence protection order legislation to assess whether they demonstrate an adequate focus on the protection of children.