41
Young male DV offenders were also more likely to fail to appear than young male Non-DV offenders. Their failure to appear rate was 3% higher (see Table 4-1). Our previous research reported that DV offenders overall (including male and female offenders of all ages) had a slightly lower FTA rate than Non-DV offenders (Peterson 2006). Thus, the higher rate for young male DV offenders reported here does not reflect general patterns for differences in FTA rates between DV and Non-DV offenders. Based on previous research (Peterson 2006), we developed a logistic regression model to predict the likelihood of FTA for young male offenders, both DV and Non-DV. The model used the defendant-based Third Quarter 2005 dataset, including only young male offenders whose cases were docketed, and who were released at some time between arraignment and disposition. TABLE 4-4 DIFFERENCES IN ODDS OF FAILURE TO APPEAR BETWEEN YOUNG MALE DV OFFENDERS AND YOUNG MALE NON-DV OFFENDERS Outcome Measure
Odds Ratio for Young Male DV Offenders vs. Young Male Non-DV Offenders1 Before predictors were added
Failure to Appear (N of cases)
1.41** (3,950)
After predictors2 were added 1.30* (3,950)
*
The odds ratio for the difference between young male DV offenders and young male Non-DV offenders was statistically significant at p < .05. ** The odds ratio for the difference between young male DV offenders and young male Non-DV offenders was statistically significant at p < .01. 1 The models for both odds ratios control for time at risk and selection bias. 2 The predictors were: whether the defendant had any prior bench warrants, whether the defendant had been arrested for a Non-DV offense in the prior two years, whether the defendant had any prior felony convictions, whether the defendant was employed, in school, and/or a training program, whether the defendant lived with someone, whether the defendant expected someone at arraignment, whether the defendant had a telephone or cell phone, whether the defendant was released at arraignment, and borough.
As in our previous analysis of FTA, we began by including two control variables in both models (i.e., both the “before” and “after” models). One was a control variable that measured time at risk, because the risk of failing to appear increases as the length of pretrial release increases. The other was a control variable to measure selection bias related to the likelihood of release. We then included a variable indicating whether the offender was a young male DV offender or a young male Non-DV offender. We first