NCJ Number
226753
Journal
Criminology Volume: 47 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2009 Pages: 269-296
Date Published
February 2009
Length
28 pages
Annotation
This study sought to determine the effect of a victim’s race on the likelihood of being seriously injured during the commission of an interracial crime, and to assess the probability of a homicide occurring during an interracial crime.
Abstract
The results tend to cast doubt on the validity of racial animosity theory, leading to the questioning of the veracity of the often-made claim that Black-on-White crimes are punished more severely. Study findings show that African-American offenders were no more apt than White offenders to injure their victims seriously during an interracial robbery or rape. An African-American offender also does not have a greater proclivity to kill a victim during the commission of an interracial crime. Results also revealed that contextual factors related to racial animosity, such as residential segregation, White-Black economic inequality, and Black-to-White unemployment, failed to have any moderating effect on either the severity of victim injury or the likelihood of a homicide occurring during an interracial crime. The patterning of interracial crime has drawn much interest. Racial animosity theory proffers that African-American offenders specifically target Whites to victimize because of their race. The racial discrimination experienced by African-Americans, coupled with the injustices of slavery, was theorized to act as a catalyst for the development of deep-seated racial animosity that was directed at Whites. To furnish a more appropriate test of racial animosity theory, the approach of this study was to model the actions of an offender during a crime to ascertain whether Black-on-White crimes were more violent than White-on-Black crimes. The study sought to determine whether a homicide was more apt to occur during the commission of a Black-on-White crime than a White-on-Black crime. Tables and references