First-time DWI offenders are at risk of recidivating regardless of sanctions imposed

Objective

Research demonstrates that punitive approaches to DWI employed by the judiciary have failed to significantly reduce recidivism. However, little is known about the deterrent effects of administrative and diversion sanctions. We examine whether such sanctions deter first-time DWI offenders.

Methods

We grouped combinations of administrative, judicial, and diversion sanctions routinely employed in the state of Maryland for processing drivers arrested for DWI into one of eight mutually exclusive disposition sequences. We applied this classification to Maryland drivers who had been licensed in the state and had precisely one DWI on their record prior to January 1, 1999. We then used a proportional hazards model to estimate the probability of remaining free of a new DWI during a 6-year period (January 1, 1999 - December 31, 2004) as a function of the disposition of the index violation, and of selected factors that could affect that probability.

Results

Drivers with a prior DWI were at relatively high risk of recidivating regardless of how they were sanctioned. Those who received administrative and alternative sanctions had a risk of recidivating similar to that of drivers who were convicted.

Conclusion

All dispositions sequences, not just convictions, indicate that first-time DWI offenders are at high risk of recidivating.     

Death caused by cardioinhibitory reflex cardiac arrest--a systematic review of cases

Forensic pathologists often refer to the cardioinhibitory reflex cardiac arrest (CiRCA) following short neck trauma as a mechanism of death. We sought via a systematic review of the literature to identify circumstances under which carotid bifurcation stimulation could lead to death. Two independent reviewers selected case studies or reports from Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase. Circumstances and contributory factors were extracted for each case. From the available data, authors independently assessed whether CiRCA was highly probable (no alternative explanation possible), probable (alternative explanation possible), or unlikely (alternative explanation highly probable). A narrative approach was used to define circumstances in which CiRCA remained possible. From the 48 published cases evoking CiRCA as a possible cause of death between 1881 and 2009, 28 were most likely to result of other mechanism of death (i.e., cerebral hypoxia due to carotid compression, mechanical asphyxia, myocardial infarction). CiRCA remained possible for 20 cases (including five based on anecdotal evidence only) with only one case with no alternative explanation other than CiRCA. Our findings support the presumption that reflex cardiac arrhythmia due to carotid bifurcation stimulation cannot provoke death alone. Actual state of knowledge suggests CiRCA might be contributory to death in the presence of drug abuse and/or cardiac pathology, often associated with physical and/or mental excitation.     

Distinguishing Two Meanings of Moral Exclusion: Exclusion from Moral Principles or Principled Harm-Doing?

The concept of “moral exclusion” has often been used to understand harm-doing. The present studies examined two, distinct meanings that have been ascribed to this concept. First, exclusion has sometimes been conceptualized as the belief that moral principles do not apply to a target person or group (e.g., exclusion from the application of justice principles). Second, the term has been used to refer to exclusion from positive treatment that is accorded to others, which the actors believe to be morally justified, though outside observers do not. Distinguishing between these two meanings can clarify the mechanisms underlying the relation between proposed antecedents to exclusion and harm-doing. In two experiments, we obtained evidence compatible with each of these conceptualizations of exclusion, as well as preliminary evidence that certain antecedents are more likely to lead to processes indicative of one or the other conceptualization. Our findings have practical implications for the reduction of harm-doing as well as for conflict that might arise in such attempts.     

Deflecting Stereotype Threat Through Downward Comparison: When Comparison with Immigrants Boosts the Performance of Stigmatized Native Students

Two experiments examined the effect of comparison with immigrants on the intellectual performance of stigmatized native students (i.e., women and students from low socioeconomic backgrounds). It was predicted that such a comparison may boost the test performance of both groups of students rather than comparison with their counterparts who are not stigmatized. In line with this hypothesis, we found that female European students (Study 1) performed better on a math test when they were led to compare with a female immigrant rather than with another female European student. Study 2 replicated this finding in regard to the performance of native students with low socioeconomic status on a general intelligence test. Results are discussed in terms of stereotype susceptibility predicaments and their implications for native-immigrant performance gaps.     

Reliability and Validity of Prisoner Self-Reports Gathered Using the Life Event Calendar Method

Data collection using the life event calendar method is growing, but reliability is not well established. We examine test–retest reliability of monthly self-reports of criminal behavior collected using a life event calendar from a random sample of minimum and medium security prisoners. Tabular analysis indicates substantial agreement between self-reports of drug dealing, property, and violent crime during a baseline interview (test) and a follow-up (retest) approximately 3 weeks later. Hierarchical analysis reveals that criminal activity reported during the initial test is strongly associated with responses given in the retest, and that the relationship varies only by the lag in days between the initial interview and the retest. Analysis of validity reveals that self-reported incarceration history is strongly predictive of official incarceration history although we were unable to address whether subjects could correctly identify the months they were incarcerated. African Americans and older subjects provide more valid responses but in practical terms the differences in validity are not large.     

Characteristics of young children exposed to violence: the safe start demonstration project

The Safe Start demonstration projects, funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) under the first phase of the Safe Start initiative, are primarily designed to influence change at the systems or macrolevels to reduce the incidence of and impact of exposure to violence for children aged birth to 6 years; direct services are also provided to young children and their families who were exposed to violence. The data presented in this article come from 10 communities that submitted data regarding the characteristics of young children exposed to violence to OJJDP. These data represent families who are typically not represented in the databases of state child protective services programs but instead have been identified by domestic violence advocates, early care and education providers, family members, court personnel, police, and other social service personnel as families with young children in need of intervention due to violence exposure.The purpose of this article is to describe the characteristics of young children and their parents who seek help for psychosocial problems related to exposure to family and community violence. Results indicate that one quarter of the children and nearly half of their parents evidenced clinical levels of stress, suggesting the need to intervene at the family level as well as at the individual level when working with young children exposed to violence. The information presented, including the extent of exposure to violence, the multiple types of violence to which children are exposed, the impact of this exposure on young children and their families, and the multiple ways in which families exposed to violence come to the attention of service providers is useful for policy makers and service providers who are interested in breaking the cycle of violence by meeting the needs of the children exposed to violence and their families.     

Die Zukunft der Verfassung

Eine Verfassung ist das Ged?chtnis der Demokratie, das gefestigte Lebenserfahrungen, bew?hrte Institutionen und erprobte Werte verbindlich an die Zukunft weitergibt. Wenn gegenw?rtig der Staat in der Erwartung an das Recht und insbesondere in seiner Finanzkraft überfordert wird, die Kraft zur Freiheit – insbesondere zu Ehe und Familie – in den Industriestaaten nachzulassen scheint, die Naturwissenschaften neue Anfragen an das Verfassungsrecht stellen, der Verfassungsstaat sich in der Europ?ischen Union und in einer weltoffenen Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft neu bew?hren muss, wird die Verfassung als "Rechtsquelle" – in ihren Entstehens- und Geltungsgrund – neu entfaltet werden müssen. Die Verfassung formt den Staat als Teil der Staatengemeinschaft, bindet ihn in Menschenwürde und Freiheitsrechten, erneuert ihn in der Idee der Freiheit und des Parlamentarismus, fordert eine Balance zwischen freiheitlicher Verschiedenheit und Gleichheit vor dem Gesetz, sichert eine Elementargerechtigkeit für Staatsvolk und Inl?nder, zugleich aber auch Entfaltungsm?glichkeiten für die Vielfalt individueller Handlungsvorhaben zu entwickeln.     

The Figuring of Morality in Adjudication: Not so Special?*

Jurisprudential debate about the grounds of law often focuses on the status of morality. Given the undoubted fact of judicial engagement with morality in legal reasoning, the key question is whether morality legitimately counts as a ground of law. This article seeks to challenge the special status accorded to morality in debates about the grounds of law. The claim I seek to advance is that very often judicial engagement with morality is not different in kind to judicial engagement with other diverse objects of legal reasoning. What the comparison tends to show is that instances of “moral reasoning” in law do not obviously challenge our account of the grounds of law. Rather these instances can be viewed as central case examples of legal reasoning. Conventional grounds of law are left untouched.