Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:58 am
Time: 3:58 am
Results for sex offenders (australia)
6 results foundAuthor: Grosskopf, Angelique Title: Online Interactions Involving Suspected Paedophiles Who Engage Male Children Summary: This paper summarises the results of a small-scale study into the online interactions of suspected paedophiles with undercover Australian police officers posing as male children. The study provides insight to an under-researched area of how persons with a sexual interest in male children interact with potential victims and whether these interactions differ from online engagements with female children. The findings provide an interesting and persuasive case to further examine online strategies used by persons wishing to exploit male children, as it highlights potential differences in approaches when compared with interactions between suspected offenders and female children. The differences include less aggressive online behaviour and language, with an emphasis on the male child’s sexuality and sexual experience. These strategies appear to assist the formation of an online friendship which precedes sexual topics, rather than the reverse as is largely reported in literature. These findings are likely to have implications for law enforcement and child protection initiatives. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2010. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 403: Accessed December 15, 2010 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/C/8/C/%7BC8C25B82-6F4A-4119-BC62-75840BA8D22A%7Dtandi403.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/C/8/C/%7BC8C25B82-6F4A-4119-BC62-75840BA8D22A%7Dtandi403.pdf Shelf Number: 120519 Keywords: Child ProtectionInternet CrimesOnline VictimizationPedophiliaSex Offenders (Australia)Sexual Exploitation, Male Victims |
Author: Biles, David Title: Sentence and Release Options for High-Risk Sexual Offenders Summary: The first phase of this project in mid July 2005 comprised the sending of requests for information to all Australian jurisdictions as well as the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand. The information sought included details of any special legislation enacted to curtail the activities of high-risk sexual offenders, any provisions in the general criminal law which could lead to the imposition of indefinite or indeterminate sentences on offenders of this type, the numbers of offenders dealt with under either of these provisions, and any evidence of the effectiveness of these measures. The United States was added to the overseas jurisdictions when a rich source of relevant information became available. This survey of the law and practice revealed that in Australia, only Victoria and Queensland had enacted special legislation on this subject. The Victorian legislation provides for the possibility of high-risk sexual offenders being ordered by a court to submit to supervision in the community for up to 15 years after any prison sentence or parole order has been served. This legislation commenced in May 2005. The Queensland legislation, which was enacted in 2003, provides for the Supreme Court, on the application of the Attorney-General, to order either continuing detention or continuing supervision in the community of serious sexual offenders who have completed their sentences. These orders must be reviewed by the Supreme Court at least every 12 months. As the legislation in both of these states is relatively recent, the numbers of offenders to whom it has been applied are quite small. In Victoria, one order with very strict conditions has been made and one other is under consideration by the courts. In Queensland, two continuing detention orders, one interim detention order and five continuing supervision orders have been made. In nearly all of the Australian jurisdictions there is provision in the general criminal law for some offenders, sometimes declared to be either dangerous or habitual, to be sentenced to indefinite prison terms. This is apparently not available in the ACT. The number of high-risk sexual offenders sentenced to indefinite terms is again relatively small, but it is difficult to be precise as other offenders, such as murderers, are commonly sentenced to life or an indefinite term. An authoritative source in the ACT estimated that there may be four cases in this jurisdiction which justify some form of special attention. The overseas law and practice presents a significantly different picture with very high numbers of sexual offenders being subjected to some form of special treatment. In the United States, for example, 15 of the 50 states have enacted civil commitment laws which provide for the detention in prison or other institution, or community supervision, for indefinite terms. The informal evidence available suggests that the numbers of offenders so committed run into the hundreds in some states. Canada also has well over 300 sexual offenders undergoing either detention or supervision in the community, many of whom are described as post warrant expiry cases. In New Zealand, specific legislation providing for extended supervision in the community for up to ten years for sexual offenders came into force in July 2004. To date a total of 32 extended supervision orders have been made by the courts. This figure may be seen as high compared with the equivalent figures in Australia. No evidence was forthcoming from Australia or overseas on the effectiveness of either the special legislation for sex offenders or the use of indefinite sentences. Most respondents said that it was too early to have any recidivism figures, but some suggested that the fact that the legislation was used must indicate an increased level of public safety as, at the very least, those offenders in detention or under very strict supervision were not committing offences. It is apparent from the information collected that there are two types of legislation that have been developed on this subject. The first is exemplified by Victoria and New Zealand, and the second is exemplified by Queensland, some parts of the United States and by Canada. There is also the possibility of either introducing or expanding the use of indefinite sentences for high-risk sexual offenders. On the basis of the analysis, it is suggested that there are four options that may be considered by the ACT Government. The options are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The options are: 1. No action, 2. Make provision for indefinite sentences, 3. Introduce post sentence continuing supervision, or 4. Introduce post sentence continuing detention. It would be logically possible to support any combination of options 2, 3 and 4, but option 1 cannot be combined with any others. Also, There may be considerable variation of the details within options 2, 3 and 4., and some of these possible variations are discussed. Following this analysis, two chapters are included which focus on the determination of highrisk sexual offending and the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment. These were prepared by a senior psychologist in ACT Corrections. Another chapter on human rights considerations was prepared by a senior officer of the ACT Department of Justice and Community Safety. These contributions to the report reflect the knowledge and points of view of two significant disciplines which are of central relevance to the subject under review. The report concludes with a discussion of a range of issues that are relevant to the terms of reference and would require careful consideration by the Government if any of options 2 to 4 are to be pursued. Apart from the ethical issue of whether or not it is acceptable to impose restrictions on the lives of individuals on the basis of probable future behaviour, a practical matter of intense interest is the potential number of offenders who would be affected by legislation that would provide for either post-sentence continuing supervision or detention. It is suggested that the high numbers identified in the USA, Canada, and perhaps even New Zealand, would not be seen as appropriate in Australia, where the numbers to date are relatively small. Other issues discussed include the level of probability of re-offending that would be reasonable to trigger additional intervention, and the type of expertise that would be needed to establish that probability. Consideration is also given to the appropriate agency for preparing cases for submission to the courts, and the desirability of a national approach to both monitoring and supervision of former sexual offenders. The consequences of a very high level of non-reporting of sexual offences are discussed, and it is suggested that this should be the subject of further research, as well as Australian research into the question of what sorts of treatment work with what sorts of offenders. Issues related to the managed release of information to victims, and the special problems presented by intellectually disadvantaged sexual offenders are then briefly discussed. Finally, attention is drawn to two papers which take opposing points of view, which are both strongly argued, and are included in the appendices to this report. The report concludes with the suggestion that this issue should be the subject of wide discussion in political circles in the relevant professions, and in the general public. Details: Canberra: Department of Justice and Community Safety, 2005. 101p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 22, 2011 at: http://www.jcs.act.gov.au/eLibrary/OtherReports/Biles%20Report.pdf Year: 2005 Country: Australia URL: http://www.jcs.act.gov.au/eLibrary/OtherReports/Biles%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 120857 Keywords: SentencingSex Offenders (Australia) |
Author: Victorian Law Reform Commission Title: Sex Offenders Registration Summary: The Commission delivered the Sex offenders registration: Final report to the Attorney-General on 22 December 2011. In April 2011, the Attorney-General asked the Commission to review laws governing the registration of sex offenders and the use of information about registered sex offenders by law enforcement and child protection agencies. The Victorian Ombudsman recommended this review in his recent report to Parliament about problems with the management of the sex offenders' registration scheme. The purpose of the review is to ensure that the legislative arrangements for the collection and use of information about registered sex offenders enable law enforcement and child protection agencies to assess the risk of re-offending, prevent further offences, and protect children from harm. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Law Reform Commission, 2012. 199p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 9, 2012 at: http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/projects/sex-offenders-registration/sex-offenders-registration-final-report Year: 2012 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawreform.vic.gov.au/projects/sex-offenders-registration/sex-offenders-registration-final-report Shelf Number: 125226 Keywords: Sex Offender RegistrationSex Offenders (Australia) |
Author: Smallbone, Stephen Title: Outcomes of Queensland Corrective Services Sexual Offender Treatment Programs Summary: The authors were engaged by Queensland Corrective Services (QCS) in March 2009 to conduct an independent outcome evaluation of QCS prison-based sexual offender programs. The evaluation set out to answer two main questions: 1. do QCS sexual offender programs produce discernable and intended therapeutic effects, and 2. do these programs produce positive effects on recidivism? The evaluation also set out to answer a number of secondary questions, namely: 1. does the effectiveness of treatment vary according to offender characteristics (e.g. for offenders with child versus adult victims; for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders; for higher- or lower-risk offenders), and 2. are treatment effects moderated by post-release circumstances (e.g. release with or without community supervision)? Risk assessment and recidivism data were obtained on 409 adult males who had served a term of imprisonment for a sexual offence, and who were discharged between April 2005 and June 2008. Recidivism data were obtained from searches of QCS and Queensland Police Service records between April 2005 and the ‘census’ date of 14 September 2009. Additional clinical data were obtained on 158 offenders who had completed a treatment program. Time-at-risk ranged from 15 months to 53 months, with an average of 29 months. Intermediate treatment outcomes were analysed by comparing pre- and post-treatment scores on a range of offender- and therapist-reported measures for the treated group (n = 158). Intermediate outcomes are reported in terms of both statistical significance and clinical significance. Longer-term treatment outcomes were analysed by comparing treated (n = 158) and untreated offenders (n = 251) on sexual recidivism, nonsexual violent recidivism, and non-violent recidivism. Because these two groups differed on static risk measures, comparisons are reported with and without statistically controlling for these differences. Details: Brisbane: Queensland Corrective Services, 2010. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 31, 2012 at: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Corporate_Publications/Reviews_and_Reports/Final%20Report_%20Outcomes%20of%20QCS%20Sexual%20Off%20Treatment%20Program.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Corporate_Publications/Reviews_and_Reports/Final%20Report_%20Outcomes%20of%20QCS%20Sexual%20Off%20Treatment%20Program.pdf Shelf Number: 125818 Keywords: Correctional Treatment ProgramsPrison-Based Treatment ProgramsSex Offender Treatment ProgramsSex Offenders (Australia) |
Author: de Andrade, Dominique Title: Classifying Queensland Incarcerated Sexual Offenders Summary: There are numerous explanations about the most accurate and effective way in which to classify sexual offenders. Typologies of sexual offenders may be based on offender or victim characteristics, situational characteristics or a combination of these (Bickley & Beech, 2001). These factors can also be combined to classify the offender according to characteristics such as the severity of the offending which might be based on an assessment of the age of the offender at first offence, the age of the victim as well as the level of violence involved. This report outlines traditional sex offender typologies often discussed in empirical research literature. Following this, a sample of 173 sex offenders incarcerated in Queensland as at 18 January 2012 have been grouped via a statistical cluster analysis. This grouping process is based on offender information gathered on the Integrated Offender Management System (IOMS), and detailed contextual information on the event(s) and the victim from court sentencing transcripts. Essentially, the analysis aims to develop a typology of the Queensland sex offender population and compare it to the traditional typologies. This comparison will identify any sex offender groups unique to the Queensland incarcerated sex offender population. Furthermore, findings will allow for the development of an operational tool that can be used at prison reception to manage sex offenders and sex offender programs more efficiently. Details: Brisbane: Queensland Corrective Services, 2013. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report No. 5: Accessed July 3, 2013 at: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Research_Publications/Research_Report_%20No_5_Classifying_Sexual_Offenders.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.correctiveservices.qld.gov.au/Publications/Research_Publications/Research_Report_%20No_5_Classifying_Sexual_Offenders.pdf Shelf Number: 129252 Keywords: Classification of OffendersSex Offenders (Australia) |
Author: Centre for Innovative Justice Title: Innovative Justice Responses to Sexual Offending: Pathways to better outcomes for victims, offenders and the community Summary: Sexual assault is complex, pervasive and insidious. The criminal justice system is expected to deliver a sense that justice has been done, yet its current response is inadequate for the large majority of sexual assault victims. Victims of sexual assault have historically been met with denial and disbelief, with society failing to develop an adequate response to a crime it did not fully recognise or understand, and to gendered assumptions it refused to relinquish. In recent decades, hard won improvements - called for by reformers and feminists, and implemented by well-intentioned governments - have seen sexual assault taken more seriously in legal and political arenas alike. Investigation, prosecution and court procedures have improved; specialisation has been encouraged; and victims have been provided with fairer treatment and additional support services. Despite this, however, sexual assault remains the most under-reported form of personal violence, while estimates suggest that the crucial evidentiary requirements and standards of proof demanded by the criminal process mean that the chance of a sexual assault incident resulting in a conviction is as low as, and potentially lower than, one in one hundred. Hard hitting policies of tougher penalties, longer sentences and stringent release practices, meanwhile, do little to address the majority of sexual offending, instead making offenders reluctant to take responsibility or their offending and choosing to contest the allegations. This in turn makes victims reluctant to pursue a prosecution, not wanting to be drawn into the protracted adversarial process. In other words, most victims of sexual assault do not report to the police, do not pursue a prosecution, or if they do, do not secure a conviction. This means that the conventional criminal justice system, with its single option of investigation by police and prosecution through the courts, is failing to provide an adequate response to the majority of victims of sexual assault. While the prosecution and collective denunciation of sexual offending should continue to be pursued, and while ongoing efforts to reform the conventional criminal justice system remain critical, alone they will not markedly change this state of affairs. Additional non-criminal law based avenues, meanwhile, such as the pursuit of statutory compensation or damages through the civil jurisdiction, have significant limitations attached. Clearly, victims need more choice in their pursuit of justice - a suite of options from which they can identify the path or paths that best suit their circumstances; options that provide them with the opportunity to tell their story, to have the harm acknowledged, to participate in the process and to have a say in the outcome. Some of these options may, to date, not have been pursued precisely because the area of sexual assault is so complex, yet may improve the justice system's response if implemented in the right way. Accordingly, this report argues that the justice system should be responsive, inclusive, flexible and fair - that justice processes should be designed in a way that make them accessible and a more realistic prospect to more victims of sexual assault, rather than reserved for a select few who happen to have cases which are able to meet high legal thresholds. This report by the Centre for Innovative Justice (CIJ) was commissioned by the Attorney-General's Department (Cth) as one of a series of reports identifying important innovations in the justice system. The CIJ's objective in this report is to identify innovative justice processes that have the potential to meet more of the needs of victims of sexual offending; to address public interest concerns; and to prevent reoffending in ways that the conventional justice system has limited capacity to achieve. In doing so, the report suggests that reform does not depend upon a choice between a 'tough' and a 'soft' response but, rather, upon providing an appropriate response - one that is able to meet the disparate needs of victims, while maintaining the integrity of the rights of offenders. As such, the report builds upon existing theoretical work and proposes a best practice, sexual offence restorative justice conferencing model and framework, influenced by national and international innovations, and which is able to be tailored and implemented in all Australian jurisdictions. Restorative justice conferencing involves a facilitated, safe and structured encounter between the victim and the offender, providing an opportunity to repair the harm caused by the offending. The report explains that, to date, restorative justice conferencing practices have tended to exist on the periphery of Australian criminal justice systems and have not been extended to sexual offending in the adult jurisdiction. This is primarily because of legitimate concerns about victims being re-victimised and sexual assault being re-privatised, rather than condemned in the public sphere. While these concerns must be heeded, the CIJ draws from a range of existing examples and concludes that - with comprehensive safeguards and a coordinated, properly resourced system - sexual offence restorative justice conferencing has the potential to meet more of the justice needs of those victims who are being failed by the existing system. In detailing a best practice restorative justice conferencing model for sexual offending, the report addresses such issues as: - The importance of legislation, overarching principles and operational guidelines - The importance of a restorative justice oversight body, incorporating a specialist gender violence team, to oversee and monitor the implementation of the model - The need for skilled and specialist restorative justice conference facilitators - The need for an expert assessment panel to determine the suitability of individual cases for restorative justice conferencing - The importance of basic eligibility criteria, including that all parties consent, and the need for offender and victim age limits - Pathways into and out of restorative justice conferencing, with appropriate police, prosecution and judicial oversight at different stages of the process - The need for protections around admissions made during a conference - The importance of consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and culturally and linguistically diverse communities around any innovative justice initiatives - The importance of restorative justice processes being responsive to the needs of victims and offenders with cognitive impairments, disabilities and mental illness - The potential outcome agreements and what to do in the event of breakdown - The importance of funded, accessible community based sexual offender treatment programs to complement a restorative justice approach, and - The balance required between victim autonomy and public policy considerations. Details: Melbourne: RMIT, Centre for Innovative Justice, 2014. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/qt1g6twlv0q3.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/qt1g6twlv0q3.pdf Shelf Number: 132790 Keywords: RapeRestorative JusticeSex CrimesSex Offenders (Australia)Sexual ViolenceVictims of Crime |