Seriousness Of Offense Research Articles

Young serious and vulnerable offenders in the Netherlands: A cohort follow‐up study after completion of a PIJ (detention) order

About 150-200 'Placement in an Institution for Juveniles Orders' (PIJ orders) are imposed each year in the Netherlands. Many of the young people under these orders have mental disorders or 'threatened psychological development' and are thought to be at high risk of recidivism. There are no previous studies of the range of judicial, correctional or psychiatric contacts after the PIJ order, but this could extend understanding of any links between post-treatment psychological development of these young offenders and their reoffending or desistence from it. To examine reoffending and judicial, correctional or psychiatric contacts of juveniles after a PIJ order, any relationship between seriousness of the index offence and first reoffence, and to test the hypothesis that 'threatened psychological development' is associated with higher recidivism rates. A records-based follow-up study of a 9-year (1995-2003) national release cohort of 781 Dutch juvenile offenders finishing a PIJ order under the Juvenile Entrustment Act. Descriptive statistics were used to show patterns of reoffending and the reoffending and non-reoffending groups compared. The mean length of the PIJ order was 2.5 years, and mean time subsequently at risk for offending was 83.5 months (range 51-135 months). After treatment under a PIJ order, serious criminal offending was reduced by 50%, and there was a trend towards less serious property offences. Contrary to prediction, 'threatened psychological development' was not associated with worse outcomes. The data offer support for the value of the PIJ order. The recidivism rate remains high, and although the trend to less serious offending is encouraging, the findings raise questions about whether criminogenic needs are sufficiently met. By contrast, the apparently low rates of adult mental disorder, even among those regarded as having had 'threatened psychological development', suggest that PIJ institutions are doing a good job with respect to mental health.

The stalking victim's decision to contact the police: A test of Gottfredson and Gottfredson's theory of criminal justice decision making

There is a significant body of research exploring the reporting behaviors of crime victims. Much of this literature has focused on specific types of victimization (e.g., sexual assault) and the correlates of victim reporting. Recently, the crimes of stalking and cyberstalking have received empirical attention; however, few studies have examined the reporting behaviors of victims of these crimes. Using the theoretical framework proposed by Gottfredson and Gottfredson (1988), the current study explored how offense seriousness, the victim-offender relationship, and the prior record of the offender influenced a victim's decision to contact the police. Data were drawn from the 2006 stalking supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey, which examined stalking in the United States. Results offered support to Gottfredson and Gottfredson (1988) and highlighted the significance of understanding the reporting behaviors for this sample of crime victims. Differences in reporting for victims of stalking and cyberstalking were also examined.

Low-intensity community supervision for low-risk offenders: a randomized, controlled trial

The Philadelphia Low-Intensity Community Supervision Experiment provides evidence on the effects of lowering the intensity of community supervision with low-risk offenders in an urban, US county community corrections agency. Using a random forests forecasting model for serious crime based on Berk et al. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 172(Part 1), 191–211, 2009, 1,559 low-risk offenders were identified and randomly assigned to either standard or reduced frequency of mandatory office visits. Treatment as assigned was substantially delivered at 4.5 probation visits per year versus 2.4, for as long as offenders remained on active probation or parole. In a one-year follow-up for all cases, outcomes examined were the prevalence, frequency, seriousness and time-to-failure of arrests for new crimes committed after random assignment was implemented. No significant differences (p = .05) in outcomes were found between standard and low-intensity groups. Non-significant differences for offense seriousness favored the low-intensity group. We conclude that lower-intensity supervision at the tested level of dosage can allow fewer officers to supervise low-risk offenders in the community without evidence of increased volume or seriousness of crime.

Proportionality in Sentencing and the Restorative Justice Paradigm: ‘Just Deserts’ for Victims and Defendants Alike?

The doctrine of proportionality seeks to limit arbitrary and capricious punishment in order to ensure that offenders are punished according to their ‘just desert’. In Australian sentencing law, proportionality goes some way toward achieving this ‘balanced’ approach by requiring a court to consider various and often competing interests in formulating a sentence commensurate with offence seriousness and offender culpability. Modification of sentencing law by the introduction of victim impact statements or the requirement that sentencing courts take explicit account of the harm done to the victim and community has generated debate, however, as to the extent to which offenders may be now subject to unjustified, harsher punishments. This article proposes that in order to overcome the controversy of the modification of offender and victim rights in sentencing, sentencing courts adhere to a doctrine of proportionality that is explicitly sensitive to the needs of victims and offenders in a model of restorative justice that focuses on the consequences of crime as against the individual, rather than the state. The extent to which proportionality, as the current constitutive principle of Australian sentencing law, may be modified to better encourage a dialogue between victim and offender is discussed.

New Models of Collaboration Between Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems

New Models of Collaboration Between Criminal Justice and Mental Health Systems

If Your Friends Jumped Off of a Bridge, Would You Do It Too? Delinquent Peers and Susceptibility to Peer Influence

Association with delinquent peer groups is one of the most salient predictors of delinquent behavior. Despite the widespread documentation of these effects, little is known about whether the delinquent peer effect is conditioned by individual‐level characteristics. Using data from a multi‐wave survey of Mexican‐American adolescents, this study explored the interactive effect of susceptibility to peer influence and differential association with delinquent peers on delinquent outcomes. Results suggested that the delinquent peer effect on self‐reported delinquency is amplified when an adolescent is highly susceptible to peer influence. Analyses also indicated that this moderating effect varies according to offense seriousness. Specifically, the conditioning effect is most important when considering acts of serious delinquency.

Staff attributions towards men with intellectual disability who have a history of sexual offending and challenging behaviour

Staff working within secure services for people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are likely to work with sexual offenders, but very little attention has been paid to how they think about this sexual offending behaviour. Forty-eight staff working within secure services for people with ID were recruited and completed the Attribution Style Questionnaire in relation to the sexual offending behaviour and challenging behaviour of men with mild ID. Attributions towards challenging behaviour and sexual offending were compared and relationships between level of ID and seriousness of the sexual offence were explored. The results indicated that staff attributed sexual offending as more external to the staff group than they did for challenging behaviour. Sexual offending behaviour was also seen as more stable, and less controllable by people with ID than was challenging behaviour. Sexual offending was also attributed as more uncontrollable by the staff group than challenging behaviour. There was a significant negative correlation between general intellectual functioning and several attributional dimensions regarding sexual offending, but not challenging behaviour. Sexual offending that was coded as more serious was attributed as universal and uncontrollable by the staff group. The differences between staff attributions regarding challenging behaviour and sexual offending potentially relate to the decision-making processes involved in deciding whether or not to involve criminal justice agencies when someone with ID commits a sexual offence. Further research within this area is warranted.

Psychopathy and offence severity in sexually aggressive and violent youth

A large proportion of violent crimes are committed by youths. Youths with psychopathic traits may have a higher risk for recidivism and violence. Our aim was to compare sexually aggressive with violent young men on offence severity and psychopathy. Three hypotheses were proposed: first, young men with previous offences would display a progressive increase in seriousness of offence during their criminal career; secondly, the sexually aggressive and violent young men would not differ in scores on the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV); but, thirdly, PCL:YV scores would be positively correlated with the severity of the index crime, as measured by the Cormier-Lang System for Quantifying Criminal History. Information was collected from the files of 40 young men in conflict with the law, and the PCL:Youth Version (YV) rated from this by trained raters. The offences of these young men became more serious over time, but we found no association between PCL:YV scores and offence type or seriousness. This exploratory research suggests the importance of understanding the progression in offending careers, but a limited role for the PCL:YV in doing so. Given the small sample size, however, and the limit on access to information about details of age, the findings need replication.

Proportionality in Sentencing and the Restorative Justice Paradigm: ‘Just Deserts’ for Victims and Defendants Alike?

The doctrine of proportionality seeks to limit arbitrary and capricious punishment in order to ensure that offenders are punished according to their ‘just desert’. Proportionality goes some way toward achieving this ‘balanced’ approach by requiring a court to consider various and often competing interests in formulating a sentence commensurate with offence seriousness and offender culpability. Modification of sentencing law by the introduction of victim impact statements or the requirement that sentencing courts take explicit account of the harm done to the victim and community has generated debate, however, as to the extent to which offenders may be now subject to unjustified, harsher punishments. This article proposes that in order to overcome the controversy of the modification of offender and victim rights in sentencing, sentencing courts adhere to a doctrine of proportionality which is explicitly sensitive to the needs of victims and offenders in a model of restorative justice that focuses on the consequences of crime as against the individual, rather than the state. The extent to which proportionality, as the current constitutive principle of Australian sentencing law, may be modified to better encourage a dialogue between victim and offender is discussed.

Heuristic influences over offense seriousness calculations

Discretionary decisions are integral to the Criminal Justice System, regardless of branch or stage. Often, structured interventions are introduced in an effort to control or guide discretion use. In the USA, grid-based sentencing guidelines are commonly used to channel sentencing discretion. However, despite their presence, research consistently shows that, net of legally relevant factors, significant racial disparity persists in sentencing outcomes under guideline structures. Although judicial and prosecutorial-based explanations for this abound, how the structural components of these guidelines (such as the offense seriousness axis) and the discretionary decisions related to them might contribute to this disparity have seldom been explored. Using federal sentencing data, a data-partitioning strategy and multilevel multivariate analyses, this study examines whether there are significant differences in the federal offense seriousness calculations for black and white defendants. The results suggest that Federal Probation Officers (FPO), in an effort to meet their diverse responsibilities in the time allotted, use heuristics when making offense seriousness determinations. This furnishes a previously neglected explanation for the persisting differential effects and highlights the utility of heuristic mechanisms in explaining both discretionary decisions and apparent disparate treatment by race or ethnicity in the criminal justice system.

Book review: Punishing persistent offenders: Exploring community and offender perspectives, Julian V. Roberts. Clarendon Studies in Criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. xix + 273 pp

In this closely argued and impressively wide ranging book, Julian Roberts examines one of the most challenging issues for sentencing theory and practice: how, if at all should previous convictions affect the severity of the sentence of the court? Neo-classical retributivist theory, often known as the 'just deserts' approach to sentencing, argues that punishment should be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence (seriousness being the sum of harm caused and the culpability of the offender). From this perspective, criminal history should play no part in allocating sentence because offenders have already received the appropriate punishment for past offences and should not be punished again.

Retributive and restorative justice: Importance of crime severity and shared identity in people's justice responses

Retributive and restorative justice present two different responses to wrongdoing: one that focuses on addressing the moral wrong through punitive sanctions (retribution) and one that focuses on addressing the harm that has been caused through reparative sanctions (restoration). Psychological investigations of what factors influence which justice outcome that people desire (retributive, restorative, or both) have focused on two constructs: crime severity and shared identity. The crime severity approach contends that people can have multiple justice goals, and which justice goals people want to fulfil is dependent on the salient features of the situation (such as offence seriousness). The shared identity approach argues that people's desire for restoration or retribution is dependent on the shared identity and perceptions of value consensus between offender and victim in the judgement context. The findings related to both of these factors are reviewed, and possibilities for future research integrating these two approaches are discussed.

How Well do Sentencing Guidelines Work?: Equity, Proportionality and Consistency in the Determination of Fine Levels in the Magistrates' Courts of England and Wales

Abstract: This article considers the scope and potential of sentencing guidelines specifically in relation to the imposition of financial penalties by the courts. Evidence is presented from research with the judiciary in England on the challenge of ensuring equity (that is, equality of impact) in the burden of such penalties, proportionality in relation to the relative seriousness of different offences, and consistency in the pattern of fine levels between individual sentencers and in different courts. The research explored how magistrates and district judges went about deciding levels of penalty to impose in a series of structured fines sentencing exercises and highlighted some of the difficulties in developing a satisfactory methodology to achieve an acceptable balance between the three objectives of achieving equity, proportionality and consistency. Key among the research findings was the prime importance in sentencers' perceptions of ‘proportionality’, and accordingly the article concludes by considering the consequences of this finding for the design of guidelines on financial penalty‐setting.

Is the Offense Serious Axis Free of Extralegal Influence?: Assessing the Predictors of a ‘Legally Relevant’ Guideline Criterion

Grid based sentencing guidelines, composed of offense seriousness and offender criminal history axis, have become a staple of US sentencing in recent decades. As such, extensive research explores whether they reduce extralegal sentence disparity. However, to date, no study has examined whether extralegal disparity is present in how either axis of guideline sentencing are constructed. Using federal sentencing commission data along with both single and multi-level analyses, this research explores the legal and extralegal factors that predict one of these key grid axes: the offense seriousness score. The results call into question not only some assumptions underlying guideline sentencing but also recent analytical strategies for assessing sentencing outcomes in guideline systems.

Kennedy, the Fall, and the Tail of Minos

In Dante's Inferno, the damned appeared before Minos, who judged the gravity of their sins and assigned their souls to their respective circles of Hell by wrapping his tail around his body. In this paper, I examine whether, in light of its decision in Kennedy v. Louisiana and its methodology for reviewing categorical exemptions from the death penalty, the Supreme Court has problematically assumed for itself the role of a kind of contemporary constitutional Minos, at least in the realm of capital punishment. First, I argue, Kennedy is a case about comparative resulting harms among violent crimes. The Kennedy dissent should have more robustly attacked the Court's categorical exemption methodology, which undervalues legitimate penological justifications for capital punishment and ultimately constitutionalizes the Court's subjective assessments of culpability and harm, allowing the Court to dictate offense seriousness, public morality, and political acceptability of the death penalty. Second, the Court's attempt to limit its holding is illusory because Kennedy's loose rhetoric and underdeveloped harm theory could jeopardize the constitutionality of any statute that permits the death penalty for a non-homicide offense, including crimes against the state, and even unintentional murders that may not satisfy the Court's own sensibilities about resulting harm. Finally, Kennedy's Minos-like approach to assessing the gravity of offenses and to imposing its own moral judgment demonstrates that there remains both relevance and legitimacy in the structural debate over the scope and exercise of judicial power, especially where that power undermines the community's reasoned efforts to cope with violent crime.

Forecasting Murder Within a Population of Probationers and Parolees: A High Stakes Application of Statistical Learning

SummaryForecasts of future dangerousness are often used to inform the sentencing decisions of convicted offenders. For individuals who are sentenced to probation or paroled to community supervision, such forecasts affect the conditions under which they are to be supervised. The statistical criterion for these forecasts is commonly called recidivism, which is defined as a charge or conviction for any new offence, no matter how minor. Only rarely do such forecasts make distinctions on the basis of the seriousness of offences. Yet seriousness may be central to public concerns, and judges are increasingly required by law and sentencing guidelines to make assessments of seriousness. At the very least, information about seriousness is essential for allocating scarce resources for community supervision of convicted offenders. The paper focuses only on murderous conduct by individuals on probation or parole. Using data on a population of over 60000 cases from Philadelphia’s Adult Probation and Parole Department, we forecast whether each offender will be charged with a homicide or attempted homicide within 2 years of beginning community supervision. We use a statistical learning approach that makes no assumptions about how predictors are related to the outcome. We also build in the costs of false negative and false positive charges and use half of the data to build the forecasting model, and the other half of the data to evaluate the quality of the forecasts. Forecasts that are based on this approach offer the possibility of concentrating rehabilitation, treatment and surveillance resources on a small subset of convicted offenders who may be in greatest need, and who pose the greatest risk to society.

Progressive Reforms or Maintaining the Status Quo? An Empirical Evaluation of the Judicial Consideration of Aboriginal Status in Sentencing Decisions

Government statistics and empirical research have long documented the fact that Aboriginal people account for a much higher proportion of Canada's inmate population than would be expected by looking at their relative proportion in the general population. In spite of this increasing focus on overrepresentation, there has been little documented change in Aboriginal incarceration rates. Section 718.2(e) was added to the Criminal Code to encourage judicial consideration of alternatives to incarceration, with particular attention to the circumstances of Aboriginal offenders. To evaluate the impact of section 718.2(e), the current study examined 691 randomly sampled sentencing decisions from the Quicklaw database to determine the extent to which Aboriginal status was correlated with judges’ sentencing decisions relative to other legally relevant factors that have traditionally guided sentencing. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses indicated that Aboriginal status did not significantly predict the likelihood of receiving a custodial or non-custodial disposition relative to aggravating and mitigating factors or sentencing objectives cited by judges. Rather, several aggravating and mitigating factors cited by judges, including offence seriousness, prior criminal history, and the plea of the offender were significantly related to sentencing decisions.

Prisoners as Citizens in a Democracy

Abstract: This article looks at voting rights for sentenced prisoners in the UK. A number of approaches are adopted by governments of the Council of Europe and the UK is one of 13 member states which operate a blanket ban on prisoners voting. Following a European Court of Human Rights judgment in 2006, the UK is now obliged to review this policy which has been held to breach an individual's right to contribute to free elections. The options open to the UK are to retain prisoner disenfranchisement or enfranchise certain serving prisoners based on criteria such as sentence length and offence seriousness.

A Multidimensional Scaling of College Students' Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty

Academic integrity is one of fundamental values of higher education. And yet cheating on tests and other forms of academic dishonesty are rampant, with McCabe (1993) concluding that student cheating is pervasive (p. 648) and others claiming that it is reaching epidemic proportions (Desruisseaux, 1999, p. A45). At first glance, it appears that percentage of students who report engaging in some type of cheating behavior varies extensively across studies. For example, in review by Whitley (1998), prevalence rates of academic dishonesty range from 9% to 95%. And Jendrek (1992) summarized that percentage of students who have self-reported engaging in some form of academic dishonesty has ranged from 40% to 90%. A closer look, however, reveals consistent estimates of cheating of well over 50% at both school and college level. Most of research on prevalence has been conducted at college level, with moderate amount also done with school students and much less so with elementary school students. Cizek (1999) summarizes research by concluding that approximately one third of elementary-school-aged students report cheating personally and ... [they] believe cheating by others is even more frequent (p. 15). At school level, a percentage of admitted cheating is consistent finding (p. 16) and at college level it is remarkably and uniformly high (p. 21). Moreover, not only has percentage of students who report engaging in some form of cheating behavior remained consistently over past fifty years, it has also been suggested that it is an underestimate of actual cheating rates (Allen, Fuller, & Luckett, 1998; Scheers & Dayton, 1987) since majority of data has been gathered through surveys, in particular self-report surveys. In addition to prevalence, which has been most widely studied aspect of academic dishonesty, much research has examined reasons students give for cheating (e.g., grades, competition, difficulty of task, time commitment). The correlates of cheating have also received attention, with research focusing on such issues as demographic differences (e.g., gender, achievement, age, fraternity/sorority membership), personality and other psychological constructs (e.g., moral reasoning, attitudes toward cheating), and environmental/situational factors (e.g., class size, proctoring concerns, opportunity to cheat). Reviews of much of this research can be found in Cizek (1999) and Whitley (1998). Institutional and faculty response has also been subject of research. For example, although faculty members report that they do not tolerate academic dishonesty, research reveals that they do little or nothing in response to such behavior. This is particularly alarming when it is clear that faculty have unique opportunity to affect student's understanding of academic standards and integrity (Gehring & Pavela, 1994), and student's perception of faculty member's response may affect his or her decision whether or not to cheat (Fass, 1986). Definitions of Academic Dishonesty Perhaps these issues are neglected, in part, because there is no commonly accepted, standard definition of what constitutes academic dishonesty. It appears deceptively easy to provide definition of cheating. For example, according to Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary (1983), cheating is defined as the act of defrauding by deceitful means (p. 308). However, it is far more difficult to arrive at agreement as to particular behaviors that could be classified as cheating, not to mention examining dimensions that people use in arriving at that classification (e.g., seriousness of offense, justification). Previous research has made implicit assumptions regarding academic integrity, definitions of academic dishonesty, and perceived seriousness of various cheating behaviors. …

AN EXPLORATION OF THE DETERMINANTS OF REPORTING CRIME TO THE POLICE IN THE CITY OF TIANJIN, CHINA*

Western research has investigated three types of correlates of crime reporting–victim‐specific (individual or household), incident‐specific, and environment‐specific variables. The current study applies this general, analytical framework to explore the determinants of crime reporting to the police in contemporary urban China. Using data collected from a recent survey of criminal victimization in Tianjin, we assess the determinants for reporting of robbery, assault, personal theft, and household burglary. The results consistently show that offense seriousness is a significant predictor of reporting for all offenses studied. Also, a nonlinear relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and reporting of burglary is found. In contrast, individual‐specific and household‐specific factors do not affect reporting, with the exception of a cumulative measure of victimization experience. Measures of neighborhood social cohesion and informal control are also not associated with reporting. The implications of these findings are discussed with reference to the unique neighborhood organizational infrastructure in urban China.