Exploring gender disparities in the prosecution of theft cases: Propensity score matching on data from German court files
| Author | Fredericke Leuschner |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/14773708211003011 |
| Published date | 01 January 2023 |
| Date | 01 January 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/14773708211003011
European Journal of Criminology
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/14773708211003011
journals.sagepub.com/home/euc
Exploring gender disparities in
the prosecution of theft cases:
Propensity score matching on
data from German court files
Fredericke Leuschner
Centre for Criminology (Kriminologische Zentralstelle), Germany
Abstract
This article engages in the discussion about gender disparities in prosecutorial decision-making.
Appling propensity score matching after multiple imputation on data drawn from case files, the
article examines differences in the prosecutorial treatment of male and female defendants in
cases of minor theft in Germany. The matched data reveal significant differences between genders
in the prosecutorial conclusion of proceedings: whereas dismissals because of other imposed
sentences are more frequently imposed on male defendants, disposals with penalty fees are
more common for female defendants. Hence, contrary to existing literature, the present study
reveals harsher prosecutorial treatment of women because they have to pay penalty fees more
frequently. The findings are contextualized with the focal concern hypothesis, which suggests that
stereotypes influence decision-making in criminal proceedings. Together with the determination
that women are more likely to pay fines or penalty fees completely and on time, this leads to the
assumption that efficiency considerations by prosecutors influence their decision and make the
imposition of penalty fees more attractive from an economic point of few.
Keywords
Gender disparities, judicial decision-making, propensity score matching, prosecution
Introduction
The general sense of justice implies that treatment by the justice authorities is fair and
equal. Whereas the impact of some factors on judicial decision-making is justifiable and
sought, other factors should not influence criminal justice outcomes and need to be
Corresponding author:
Fredericke Leuschner, Centre for Criminology (Kriminologische Zentralstelle), Luisenstraße 7, Wiesbaden,
65185, Germany.
Email: f.leuschner@krimz.de
1003011EUC0010.1177/14773708211003011European Journal of CriminologyLeuschner
research-article2021
Article
2023, Vol. 20(1) 292–315
eradicated.1 In this context, a recurrent issue in research is the differing treatment of men
and women by criminal justice personnel.
In the context of gender disparities in criminal justice decisions, prosecutors receive
comparatively less scientific attention than the courts. Consequently, scholars emphasize
that research should consider the stages of the criminal justice system prior to decisions
on incarceration or the length of penalty (Doerner and Demuth, 2010; Kutateladze et al.,
2014). After all, for instance in the inquisitorial justice system of Germany, prosecutors
lead the investigation, instruct the police and are expected to find all the evidence –
incriminating as well as exculpatory – to objectively uncover the truth (Boyne, 2015).
After completing the investigation, prosecutors can either reject or dismiss the case or an
indictment promotes the case to a court (Boyne, 2015; Krey, 1999; Wade, 2008). As a
result, the majority of cases – about 60 percent – are concluded by the prosecution
offices; about 30 percent of all cases are dismissed although sufficient evidence is avail-
able (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2019). Considering that and additionally the fact that
case-processing decisions also influence later outcome decisions (Jeffries and Fletcher,
2003; Wade, 2008), it becomes clear that prosecutors are substantive actors in criminal
proceedings, and not just in Germany (Boyne, 2015; Wade, 2008).
Another problem concerning current findings is that most of the existing research has
been conducted in the USA.2 It remains unclear whether findings from the adversarial
system can be transferred to inquisitorial systems (for example, in Germany), where
there is very little research on that topic. Hence, this research can broaden our knowledge
about gender disparities in judicial decision-making by adding a cross-national
perspective.
In the current study, minor theft cases were examined. These are characterized by the
fact that almost all cases are concluded by the prosecutor. Additionally, these cases are
very similar and little information on the case or the defendant is assembled in the files.
Thus, preconceptions linked to certain known factors such as gender gain relevance for
decision-making.
Because it is well known that women commit different types of offences with differ-
ent motives and using different methods, it is especially necessary to adequately control
confounders that might also influence the prosecutorial decision. The current study uses
propensity score matching, in which every case committed by a woman is matched to a
comparable case committed by a man (Apel and Sweeten, 2010).
Research context
The impact of gender on decision-making
There are several studies – predominantly US – examining possible gender disparities in
criminal proceedings. Most of the research is focused on sentencing outcomes in the
form of incarceration decisions or sentence length (Kutateladze et al., 2014). Gender
disparities in incarceration decisions were determined most frequently (Doerner and
Demuth, 2010; Embry and Lyons, 2012; Freiburger, 2010; Gruhl et al., 1984; Koons-
Witt et al., 2014; Spohn, 1999; Van Wingerden et al., 2016; Wermink et al., 2015), but
they were not consistently found in sentence length (Daly and Tonry, 1997; Gruhl et al.,
293
Leuschner
To continue reading
Request your trial