Abstract

The proposition that the public will be likely to accept a reduction in the use of imprisonment as a penalty for property offenders if these offenders are required to make restitution was tested through the use of simultaneously conducted surveys of two random samples of 1200 persons each drawn from the New Zealand electoral rolls. Both the control and experimental (restitution) groups were presented with six crime incidents describing serious property crimes, were asked to indicate if imprisonment or some other penalty was selected, were permitted to indicate one or more penalties from descriptive statements representing fine, probation, community service sentence, and non-residential periodic detention; the restitution group was permitted to include restitution as a non-custodial penalty. Response rates of 76% for the control group and 80% for the restitution group were achieved from postal questionnaires. For all six crime incidents higher proportions of the control than restitution group recommended i...

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call