Appellate Review of Child Sexual Abuse Convictions: The Importance of Character Evidence.

This study examined the role of character evidence and other issues in criminal appeals of child sexual abuse (CSA) convictions. Character evidence includes uncharged acts and character witnesses who testify to another's reputation or opinion and is offered to prove an individual's propensities. Examining 168 appellate court opinions reviewing CSA convictions between 2005 and 2015 in Maricopa County, Arizona, we found that when specific types of evidence were at issue, they were most often character evidence issues (49%). However, appellate courts virtually never reversed convictions (n = 5), and when defendants did obtain relief, the reduction in charges or in sentences was minor. Of the small number of opinions that were published (n = 4), all focused on character evidence, including the single case reviewed by the Arizona Supreme Court. However, close examination of the published cases suggested they effected only modest change.

Toward the development of a perceived IRB violation scale.

This study introduces survey items that can be used to assess the perceived prevalence of specific IRB violations by researchers or to gauge the perceived seriousness of such infractions. Using survey data from tenured and tenure-track faculty at research-intensive universities, the descriptive findings showed that the failure to properly store data and neglecting to maintain project records were perceived to be the most widespread violations by sample members. Although comparatively less definitive, the results also showed that problems with data storage and record keeping were perceived to be relatively serious violations. As for scaling, the results from the exploratory factor analyses showed that the prevalence and seriousness scales were unidimensional. These findings support the practice of providing researchers with services for storing project data and records. Finally, the IRB violation scale developed in this study can be used by research integrity professionals to assess faculty perceptions at their universities.

Examining the impact of a crime gun intelligence center.

With gun crime on the rise, efforts to curb this form of violence have captured the attention of government agencies and police departments alike. One form of such efforts is the proliferation of Crime Gun Intelligence Centers (CGICs) in police departments across the country. However, with only three non-peer-reviewed evaluations of these CGICs to date, our understanding of their effectiveness is limited. The present study aims to fill this gap by examining the impact of the Phoenix Police Department's (PPD) CGIC on clearance rates and prosecutorial outcomes for gun crimes. The data for this study come from PPD's Records Management System (RMS), computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system, impounded evidence, National Integrated Ballistics Information Network (NIBIN) lead data, and arrest data. Prosecutorial data were supplied by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office (MCAO). This study examined pretest and posttest differences that occurred over the study period. Difference-in-difference (DID) models were calculated to assess the impact of the CGIC on the outcome measures of interest. We found that from the year prior to the CGIC to 2 years post-CGIC, NIBIN inputs increased by 115%, NIBIN leads increased by 163%, timeliness of entry (of ballistics evidence) improved with 32% of processed items entered within 24-48 h in the second year of the CGIC compared with only 3% the year preceding the CGIC, and clearance rates for arrests increased significantly. These findings have implications for the continued adoption of CGIC, as well as the utility of NIBIN.