A New Leviathan: Benefit Sanctions in the Twenty‐first Century

This article highlights the spectacular growth of benefit sanctions in the United Kingdom which, at their peak, exceeded the number of fines imposed in the criminal courts. It proposes a three‐fold typology of monetary sanctions – punitive judicial sanctions, exemplified by court fines, regulatory administrative sanctions, exemplified by parking penalties, and disciplinary administrative monetary sanctions, exemplified by benefit sanctions – and compares them in terms of their main aims, how they are imposed, whether the interests of those sanctioned are protected, their severity, the socio‐economic characteristics of offenders, the hardship caused, how proportionate they are, and whether they are compatible with justice. It argues that they are particularly problematic because their severity causes great and disproportionate hardship, and because, in addition to punishing offenders, they also attempt to discipline them by managing their behaviour, and concludes that, in the United Kingdom, they function as a key instrument for disciplining and managing the poor.     

COMPARING DELINQUENCY CAREERS IN COURT RECORDS AND SELF‐REPORTS*

Most knowledge about delinquency careers is derived from official records. The main aim of this paper is to compare conclusions about delinquency careers derived from court referrals with conclusions derived from self‐reports. Data are analyzed from the Seattle Social Development Project, which is a prospective longitudinal survey of 808 youths. Annual court and self‐report data were available from age 11 to age 17 for eight offenses. The prevalence of offending increased with age, in both court referrals and self‐reports. There was a sharp increase in the prevalence of court referrals between ages 12 and 13, probably because of the reluctance of the juvenile justice system to deal with very young offenders. The individual offending frequency increased with age in self‐reports, but it stayed constant in court referrals, probably because of limitations on the annual number of referrals per offender. There was significant continuity in offending in both court referrals and self‐reports, but continuity was greater in court referrals. The concentration of offending (and the importance of chronic offenders) was greater in self‐reports. An early age of onset predicted a large number of offenses in both self‐reports and court referrals. However, an early onset predicted a high rate of offending in court referrals but not in self‐reports, possibly because very young offenders who were referred to court were an extreme group. About 37% of offenders and 3% of offenses led to a court referral. The more frequent offenders were less likely to be referred to court after each offense, but most of them were referred to court sooner or later. There was a sharp increase between ages 12 and 13 in the probability of an offender and an offense leading to a court referral. It is concluded that criminal career research based on self‐reports sometimes yields different conclusions compared with research based on official records.     

Expanding a community's justice response to sex crimes through advocacy, prosecutorial, and public health collaboration: introducing the RESTORE program

Problems in criminal justice system response to date-acquaintance rape and nonpenetration sexual offenses include (a) they are markers of a sexual offending career, yet are viewed as minor; (b) perpetrators are not held accountable in ways that reduce reoffense; and (c) criminal justice response disappoints and traumatizes victims. To address these problems, a collaboration of victim services, prosecutors, legal scholars, and public health professionals are implementing and evaluating RESTORE, a victim-driven, community-based restorative justice program for selected sex crimes. RESTORE prepares survivors, responsible persons (offenders), and both parties' families and friends for face-to-face dialogue to identify the harm and develop a redress plan. The program then monitors the offender's compliance for 12 months. The article summarizes empirical data on problems in criminal justice response, defines restorative justice models, and examines outcome. Then the RESTORE program processes and goals are described. The article highlights community collaboration in building and sustaining this program.     

The natural history of extended co-offending

Most criminal acts are committed in very small groups or alone, and are repeated sporadically. But that is not always the case. Co-offending can include larger groups, cooperating sequentially or simultaneously, knowing each other or at least knowing about one another. We may use the term “extended co-offending” to subsume varieties of crime organization, crime networks, gangs, and criminal clusters. Extended co-offending also includes vaguely organized crime repetitions, and is a matter of degree. Criminal cooperation can be extended in time, space, numbers of persons involved, and types of criminal action. The extension process has a very wide span of possibilities. Drawing ideas from Max Weber and others, this paper suggests that the natural history of criminal cooperation progresses in four stages, with steeply decreasing prevalence: (1) primordial clusters of offenders, (2) small-scale charismatic leadership of offenders, (3) a medium-scale patrimonial system of offenders, and (4) and an extended patrimonial system of criminal cooperation. Primordial co-offending occurs on a very local level, with little or no hierarchy or systematic repetition. Extended criminal cooperation usually requires personal trust among offenders, favoring patrimony over formal organization.     

Discretion and the Sex Dyad: Exploring the Interactive Effects of Offender and Victim Sex on Reporting and Arrest of One-on-One Assaultive Crime

Gender has been hypothesized to affect how violent offenders are treated within the criminal justice system, but studies have tended to ignore the role of the victim in decision making. This study explores the interactive effects of offender and victim sex (i.e., the sex dyad) on reporting and arrest of one-on-one assaultive crime. Using data from the National Crime Victimization Survey and National Incident-Based Reporting System, findings show that male-on-female offenses are reported to police more often than other dyads, but female-on-male offenses result in more arrests. Meanwhile, female-on-female offenses result in fewer arrests, despite nonsignificant differences in reporting. Implications of findings for theory and future research on gender discretion are discussed.     

VARIATION IN TRIAL PENALTIES AMONG SERIOUS VIOLENT OFFENSES*

We examine the differences in the sentencing of those who plead guilty and those convicted by jury trial among defendants convicted of serious violent offenses. Drawing from a focal concerns and court communities perspective on court decision making, we develop several hypotheses about jury trial penalties for serious violent offenders, and how such penalties may vary by offense characteristics, defendant characteristics, and court contexts. Our hierarchical models using Pennsylvania sentencing data from 1997 to 2000 reveal that defendants are substantially penalized if they exercise their right to a jury trial and then lose. Furthermore, this jury trial penalty is not evenly assessed, but depends on the seriousness and type of offense, defendant criminal history, and court contextual characteristics such as caseload, court community size, local violent crime rates, and the size of local black populations.     

‘Criminal families’ and the court: co-offending in Amsterdam, 1897–1902

This article focuses on a specific aspect of the history of crime: co-offending (offending with one or more accomplices) in a family setting at the end of the nineteenth century. The aims of this article are to analyze how genders interacted in a criminal setting and to show a possible bias in the court's decision to prosecute ‘criminal families’, either in relation to the people involved or to the environment in which the crime was committed. This article also questions the relevance of the concept of the civilizing mission in a court setting towards ‘criminal families’ and compares it with the reality of the court's work. The study is based on the archives of Amsterdam's Arrondissementsgerecht between 1897 and 1902. This court was in charge of trying criminal offences committed in Amsterdam and its surrounding area (a semi-urban environment within a 25-kilometre radius) according to the 1886 Dutch code of laws. Urban and semi-urban co-offending criminal rates in Amsterdam and its surrounding area are compared, as well as gender patterns and class origins in relation to the crimes committed, in order to highlight a possible prejudice towards working-class offenders. The analysis reveals a high rate of co-offending in female criminality and more gender interactions in the urban environment. However, the results also show that, despite a general anxiety towards working-class families and rising crime rates, magistrates were not more inclined to prosecute them. The family situation was taken into account before trials, and semi-urban families were not treated more leniently than urban families.     

The influence of court location on type of criminal sentence: The rural-urban factor

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of court location on criminal sentencing. Previous research in both the field of rural-urban sociology and public-policy decision making suggested that differences in the location of the sentencing court might result in different sentences being imposed on criminal offenders. Review of the criminal sentencing literature located several empirical studies which had previously focused on the rural-urban factor and criminal sentencing. The findings from those studies coupled with the conceptual linkages between rural-urban attitudes and values, public-policy decision making, and judicial sentencing provided a rationale for assuming that the sentences imposed on convicted offenders in rural, suburban, and urban courts might differ. Data for the study consisted of a secondary sample of 1,664 convicted Iowa felony offenders derived from archival sources including the Iowa Division of Adult Corrections and the Bureau of Correctional Evaluation within the Iowa Department of Social Services. The major finding from the study was that in urban courts legal considerations were of greater importance than extralegal ones in accounting for the sentences received by offenders, while in rural and, to a limited degree, in suburban courts, the opposite was true. The findings from the study contain theoretical and policy-related implications regarding criminal sentencing.     

The networks of drug offenders

The serious drug and drug smuggling offenders active in Stockholm are linked by means of co-offending to other persons in large criminal networks. Within these networks, the individuals have large numbers of superficial and transient contacts with one another. It appears to be particularly important to have contacts with other drug offenders throughout Sweden, and particularly in the Skåne region. The majority of the convicted drug offenders have a Nordic background. The study indicates that dealers in the Stockholm area know drug smugglers in Sweden’s metropolitan areas. In their turn, the drug smugglers in the metropolitan areas have contacts with persons involved in the smuggling of other goods primarily in the county of Skåne. A large proportion of the persons included in the data set were suspected of committing drug offences and appear to be focused to some extent on drug offending and on offences involving one or two illicit substances. They also engage in other types of criminal activity to a large extent, however, and are thus not exclusively specialised in drug offending. Persons involved in serious drug crime, including drug smuggling, are often males in their thirties. These individuals often choose other males as co-offenders. It is generally common to commit drug offences together with co-offenders and the most criminally active individuals are also those with the largest numbers of co-offenders. The co-offending partnerships that commit drug offences are not particularly durable over time, however, and it is unusual for drug offenders to restrict themselves to committing offences with one and the same co-offender.     

Stereotypes influence beliefs about transfer and sentencing of juvenile offenders

Despite sharp drops in juvenile crime since the mid-1980s, punitive policies regarding juveniles who commit serious offenses still exist. We assessed beliefs about two such practices: transferring offenders from the juvenile justice to the criminal justice system, and subjecting them to sentences of life without parole (LWOP). We examined whether stereotypes about juvenile offenders – the extent to which people believe they are dispositionally violent superpredators versus economically and socially impoverished wayward youth – influence support for these policies. We measured 321 participants’ beliefs about the causes of juvenile crime and juveniles’ potential for recidivism and rehabilitation. Using vignette methodology and actual case facts, we described a 13-, 17-, or 21-year-old offender who murdered a stranger or abusive parent, and asked whether he should be transferred to criminal court and sentenced to LWOP. As endorsement of the superpredator stereotype increased, so did support for these practices. Offenders who murdered an abusive parent were shown more leniency. Older offenders were generally treated harsher, except by people with strong superpredator stereotypes who, on the issue of LWOP appropriateness, did not distinguish among juveniles of different ages. Findings suggest that stereotypes can influence judgments in cases involving juveniles and indirectly affect policy-making about juvenile offending.     

Sentencer and offender factors as sources of discrimination in magistrates' penalties for drinking drivers

This study examined the contributions of sentencer and case (legal and extralegal) factors to magistrates' sentences for 678 drink-drivers at 2 courts. Qualitative codings of magistrates' sentencing orientations were incorporated with case factors in a multivariate statistical model of differences in fines and disqualifications. Discriminations in penalties were related to offenders' legally relevant prior offenses and blood alcohol concentrations, and extralegal variables of offender age, gender and employment status. Men were treated more harshly than women, and young offenders more harshly than all other offenders except those over 56 years. Unemployed offenders were fined less, but disqualified for longer than offenders in the workforce. Magistrates' orientations and court interacted with offense categories to produce further differences related to blood alcohol concentration and recidivism. Sentencers responded to offender characteristics but also relied on their own mental images of stereotypic drink-drivers and their individualized sentencing orientations to exercise their discretionary powers. Results are discussed in relation to issues of warranted or justifiable discriminations and the just distribution of penalties.     

Legal,Psychological, and Behavioral Outcomes

States have responded to the public's outrage at rising juvenile crime by revising their transfer statutes to make it easier to transfer juvenile offenders for trial and sentencing in criminal court and possible incarceration in adult prisons. These changing trends in juvenile justice raise three questions about what actually happens to juveniles once they are in the adult criminal justice system. To what extent does trial in adult court and/or incarceration in adult prisons promote or retard community protection, juvenile offenders' accountability, and the development of competencies in juvenile offenders? This article discusses state transfer laws and the legal consequences of criminal court prosecution, and analyzes current research on deterrence effects of transfer laws, conviction and sentencing in juvenile versus criminal court, recidivism rates in juvenile versus criminal court, and conditions and programming in juvenile versus adult correctional facilities. The research findings have two important implications for juvenile justice policy: the number of juvenile cases transferred to criminal court should be minimized, and imprisonment of juveniles in adult facilities should be avoided whenever possible. These implications are discussed, and directions for future research are identified.     

Capitalizing on Criminal Accomplices: Considering the Relationship between Co-offending and Illegal Earnings

This study investigates whether co-offending offers an avenue towards criminal success. Specifically, it considers if current and prior co-offending experience is related to the probability of reporting illegal earnings as well as the amount of these earnings. Using data from the Pathways to Desistance Study, we estimated fixed-and random-effects models to test whether co-offending experience is related to self-reported illegal earnings. The models also estimated whether “historical” co-offending experience predicted current illegal earnings. Across both modeling strategies, current and historical co-offending predicted the probability of reporting non-zero illegal earnings, net of offending frequency and controls. There is minimal evidence of a relationship between co-offending experience and the amount of illegal earnings, however. These findings lead us to conclude that access to a relatively common criminal connection—the co-offender—offers tangible benefits to adolescent offenders, primarily by affecting their ability to translate criminal opportunities into monetary gain.     

Crime from the keyboard: organised cybercrime,co-offending,initiation and knowledge transmission

This paper examines a predominantly Australian sample of computer crime offenders involved in fraud and/or unauthorised access. This paper focuses on the extent to which offenders are involved in organised crime, the nature of the relationship between co-offending, initiation and knowledge transmission, and how the online environment facilitates organised crime and co-offending. This qualitative analysis draws from interviews with self-identified offenders, law enforcement officers who investigate these offenses, and court documents, providing a unique understanding of organised crime involving computer systems.     

Environmental crime prosecutions in Ireland, 2004–2014

Despite increased interest in environmental crime and green criminology, few studies address the use of criminal penalties in response to environmental crimes. A handful of published examples employ data from the United States or the Flanders court system, and little is known about how other nations punish environmental violations. Addressing this issue, the current study examined the use of criminal environmental penalties in Ireland from 2004 to 2014. Few criminal environmental cases (N = 147) and few environmental offenders (N = 154) were represented in these data over time. Consistent with the expectations of green/environmental crime researchers, mean penalties for environmental violations, which in Ireland only include fines and investigative cost recovery penalties, were rather small. Unlike in the US or Flanders, the majority of offenders were corporate offenders as opposed to individuals. Contextual factors related to Ireland’s economy, history and use of criminal sanctions should be used to interpret these factors, and prevent generalising from these data.     

THE JUVENILE PENALTY: A COMPARISON OF JUVENILE AND YOUNG ADULT SENTENCING OUTCOMES IN CRIMINAL COURT*

This study uses criminal court data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) to investigate the sentencing of juvenile offenders processed in adult criminal court by comparing their sentencing outcomes to those of young adult offenders in similar situations. Because the expanded juvenile exclusion and transfer policies of the 1990s have led to an increase in the number of juveniles convicted in adult courts, we argue that it is critical to better understand the judicial decision making processes involved. We introduce competitive hypotheses on the relative leniency or severity of sentencing outcomes for transferred juveniles and interpret our results with the focal concerns theoretical perspective on sentencing. Our findings indicate that juvenile offenders in adult court are sentenced more severely than their young adult counterparts. Moreover, findings suggest that juvenile status interacts with and conditions the effects of other important sentencing factors including offense type, offense severity and prior criminal record. We discuss these results as they relate to immediate outcomes for transferred juveniles, criminal court processes in general and the broader social implications for juvenile justice policy concerning the transfer of juveniles to criminal court.     

Friends with(out) benefits: co-offending and re-arrest

Research shows that co-offending has contradictory effects on rates of re-arrest. On the one hand, group offending may be riskier: for example, co-offenders might be targeted by police or might snitch to protect themselves. Criminal networks may also have indirect effects: offenders embedded in criminal networks commit more offences and thus should have a higher risk of being arrested at some point. On the other hand, networks generate steady criminal opportunities with relatively low risk of arrest and high monetary benefits (e.g. drug trafficking). Few authors have empirically explored the relation between co-offending and re-arrest. This article does so using data from seven years of arrest records in the province of Quebec, Canada. The analysis is designed to explore why some offenders are re-arrested after an initial arrest while others are not. It focuses on the factors involved in re-arrest, considering two distinct levels of measures of co-offending. The first level of analysis takes into account a situational measure that indicates whether a given offence was committed by co-offenders (group offence). The second level is used to examine whether being part of a criminal network influences re-arrest. For offenders embedded in such networks, two network features (degree centrality and clustering coefficient) show that the global position of individuals within the Quebec arrest network are analysed. Our results suggest that co-offending is a crucial factor that should be taken into account when looking at the odds of being caught again. The use of generalised linear mixed model brings interesting nuances about the impact of co-offending. The article adds to the recently growing literature on the link between networks and criminal careers.     

The Effect of Prior Youth Court Dispositions on Current Disposition: An Application of Societal-Reaction Theory

This paper tests hypotheses implicit in the societal-reaction perspective concerning the nature and pattern of the relationship between prior and current youth court dispositions. The dispositional stage is the most critical decision-making level which young offenders encounter in their contact with the youth court system. Previous research has produced inconsistent results in the attempt to determine which model or models of justice underlie dispositional decisions by youth court judges. Log-linear modeling is employed on 16,636 youth court cases in Canada in 1993/1994 to determine the nature and magnitude of the relationship between current and prior dispositions. The results indicate that prior youth court dispositions exert a significant impact on current dispositions, even when relevant variables are controlled. Evidence is found mainly of stabilization—the repetition of the same type of disposition—and also of escalation in dispositions. These findings provide support for the societal-reaction theory and possibly for the desert-based theory of sentencing.     

Court processing and sentencing of drinking drivers: Using new methodologies

Driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenses provide a unique focal point for research in criminology. In recent years, legislative and media attention has increasingly focused on the harmful acts of drunk drivers, but little is known of the characteristics of individuals arrested for driving while drunk or of the court processing and sanctioning of such offenders. The research presented here uses a variety of methodological techniques to analyze individual-level court processing data for persons convicted of DWI on a revoked license. We find that the population of persons processed for this offense have certain characteristics which are not unlike those of persons processed for street crimes. Further, we find evidence of differential sanctioning related to ethnicity and level of education. We conclude with a call for future investigation of court processing to understand better why the DWI legislative mandate is being applied differently across social groups.     

Short-term outcomes for offenders with mental illness released from incarceration

Using data on 247 offenders with mental illness, this analysis seeks to identify characteristics that distinguish those who are returned to prison or a psychiatric hospital with those who remain in the community. Sociodemographic, mental health, criminal history, and service variables are compared across a range of outcome categories with a focus on those reinstitutionalized and those reincarcerated. Those returning to institutions have somewhat different mental health service and criminal justice histories than the engaged/community group. In particular, the group that is reincarcerated is more likely released from misdemeanor sentences, and the group being released from felony sentences is more likely to be found in a psychiatric hospital after release from correctional custody. These findings have implications regarding the cumulative effects of engagement with the criminal justice system and the process through which persons with mental illness and a criminal history cycle through institutions.