Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:06 pm
Time: 9:06 pm
Results for offender classification
1 results foundAuthor: Mercado, Cynthia Calkins Title: Sex Offender Management, Treatment, and Civil Commitment: An Evidence Based Analysis Aimed at Reducing Sexual Violence Summary: This study was designed to provide a comprehensive exploratory examination of the program management, treatment, and recidivism of sexual offenders in New Jersey. There were four main objectives of the research: 1) To provide normative data on a large sample of New Jersey sex offenders; 2) To determine which sex offenders get selected for treatment and what criteria are used to make that decision; 3) To examine the effect of treatment on recidivism; and 4) To compare those offenders selected for commitment as a Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) with those offenders not selected for commitment. Data were gathered from the archival records of 3,168 male sex offenders who were housed at either a prison-based sex offender treatment facility (treatment group) or any of the New Jersey State prisons (no treatment group) and released from custody between the years 1996 and 2007. Additionally, archival data were gathered from all detained or committed SVPs. Federal and state recidivism data were obtained for all released offenders. Ultimately, three general outcome categories were the focus of the analyses: selection for treatment (determined by whether the offender was housed at the prison-based sex offender treatment facility), recidivism (determined by whether an offender was convicted of an additional offense - sexual or non-sexual - following release), and SVP commitment (determined by whether the offender was released or civilly committed upon completion of the index sentence). After coding the archival file data for offender characteristics, offense characteristics, risk assessment outcomes, and recidivism (and what type of recidivism, if applicable), comparisons were made via chi-square analysis and independent samples t-test across these three outcomes; that is, we compared treated and non-treated offenders, recidivists and non-recidivists, and committed and not-committed offenders on these factors. Additionally, a series of classification tree analyses and logistic regressions were conducted to gather insight into what factors were most strongly indicative of selection for treatment, SVP commitment, and recidivism. The following points highlight the major findings for each objective of the study: Objective One - The overwhelming majority of offenders in this sample had female victims (83.9%; n = 2,566), indicating that women and girls continue to be among those most victimized by sexual violence. - Nearly three-quarters of the index crime events involved molestation of a minor child, and despite a popular notion of "stranger danger" that is prevalent across sexual crimes (an assumption that is arguably an influential factor in sex offender legislation), most offenders knew their victims. Over 44% of the sample perpetrated an offense against someone with whom they were already acquainted (but not related), and an additional one-third of the sample offended against an immediate or extended family member. - A minority (15%) of the offenses were perpetrated against strangers, suggesting that the "stranger danger" notion of offending (upon which much sex crime legislation is based) may not reflect the empirical reality that most sex crimes (85%) are committed by individuals known to the victim - With regard to prior criminal history, nearly 70% of the offenders had been charged with a prior non-sexual offense; however, less than one-third of the sample had a prior history of sexual offenses, providing some support for the notion that sex offenders may be more generalist rather than specialist in their offending patterns. Objective Two - The best predictor of placement in the treatment facility was the demonstration of some treatment amenability or readiness for treatment. Choosing offenders based upon their willingness to participate in treatment may, however, exclude those offenders who are at highest risk to recidivate. - Those placed in the treatment facility had lower risk scores than those in the general population, which may run contrary to the risk-need-responsivity principle of providing the most intensive services to those of highest need. Objective Three - In terms of general recidivism (i.e., recidivism of any nature), those offenders who did not receive treatment recidivated (in terms of a new conviction) at twice the rate of those who did receive treatment (51.7% versus 25.0%), and this difference remained even when the groups were matched with regard to actuarial risk scores. - When looking specifically at sexual recidivism rates, we found that overall 5% of the offenders in our sample were re-convicted of a new sexual offense over an average 6.5 year follow-up period. - No differences in sexual recidivism were found between the treated and untreated groups, even when these groups were matched in terms of recidivism risk. Though random assignment to treatment conditions is seldom possible in research of this nature, future studies that use random assignment would allow for firmer conclusions regarding treatment effectiveness. - Sex offenders who offended against strangers were more likely than those who were acquainted with or related to their victim to re-offend after treatment. Likewise, sex offenders who had adult victims were more likely to offend after treatment than those who had minor victims. Objective Four - Sex offenders selected for civil commitment were found to be at significantly higher risk of recidivating (based on Static-99 and MnSOST-R actuarial risk scores) than offenders not committed under SVP statutes. - Sex offense history, MnSOST-R historical scale score, prior history of any contact sexual offense, use of weapon during index offense, age at first sex offense, history of psychiatric problems, age of victim, and age at first non-sexual offense were predictive of SVP commitment. - Based upon re-conviction data, those considered for civil commitment but ultimately not committed were found to have high rates of any kind of recidivism (67%). Details: New York: John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2013. 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 2, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243551.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243551.pdf Shelf Number: 130140 Keywords: Civil CommitmentOffender ClassificationRecidivismSex Offender TreatmentSex OffendersSexual Violence |