Multiple Perpetrator Rape Committed by Female Offenders:A Comparison of Solo, Duo, and 3+ Group Offenders

Previous studies on multiple perpetrator rapes have shown that male sexual offenders who commit their offense alone differ on offender, offense, and victim characteristics from those who commit their offense in duos and 3+ groups. For the current study, 246 female sexual offenders have been studied regarding their co-offending pattern and the differences in offender, offense, and victim characteristics. Significant differences between solo (n = 73), duos (n = 146), and 3+ group offenders (n = 27) were found for the age at the first conviction, age at the time of the index offense, performed sexual acts, physical and verbal violence, victim gender, victim relationship, victim age, and location where the abuse took place. There were four indicators that could predict the assault type. Co-offenders were more likely than solo offenders to perform penetration on a female, intrafamilial victim who they assaulted indoors. These results have implications for interventions with offenders and criminal justice authorities

Myspace, Yourspace, But Not Theirspace: The Constitutionality of Banning Sex Offenders From Social Networking Sites

In recent years there has been intense public pressure to enact increasingly restrictive and intrusive sex offender laws. The regulation of sex offenders has now moved online, where a growing amount of protected expression and activity occurs. The latest trend in sex offender policy has been the passage of state laws prohibiting sex offenders from visiting social networking sites, such as Myspace or Facebook. The use of these websites implicates the First Amendment right of expressive association. Broad social-networking-site bans threaten the First Amendment expressive association rights of sex offenders, who do not lose all of their constitutional rights by virtue of their conviction. Although social-networking-site bans are politically attractive on the surface, such prohibitions are fundamentally flawed because they are predicated on a number of widespread misconceptions about sex offenses and sex offender behavior. These misconceptions include the beliefs that all registered sex offenders are violent sexual predators who have extremely high recidivism rates and that Internet predators are increasing the incidence of sex crimes against minors. In fact, there is very little evidence to indicate that this type of legislation will help reduce sexual violence. This Note argues for empirically based and narrowly tailored sex offender policies that will strike the appropriate balance between protecting minors from sexual abuse and respecting sex offenders\u27 constitutional rights. Such an approach is more likely to help rehabilitate offenders and thus protect children and others from sexual predators

Updating the Social Network: How Outdated and Unclear State Legislation Violates Sex Offenders’ First Amendment Rights

Readily available on computers, phones, tablets, or television, social media has become a necessary platform of expression for many. But, for others, social media is an inaccessible tool whose very use has criminal repercussions. To protect innocent children, many states have enacted legislation restricting sex offenders’ access to social media. Unfortunately, this legislation is often outdated, overly restrictive, and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. North Carolina has recently attracted national attention, as its statute highlights the potential constitutional issues states face in drafting such legislation. To avoid the constitutional concerns that North Carolina faces, state legislators must draft statutes narrowly and provide ample alternative channels of communication for sex offenders. This Note first analyzes current state legislation restricting sex offenders’ social media usage, focusing specifically on North Carolina’s statute. It then discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case Packingham v. North Carolina, challenging the constitutionality of North Carolina’s statute under the First Amendment. This Note explains how Packingham offers the Supreme Court an opportunity to clarify and instruct states on how to properly draft future legislation. Specifically, the Court must address what constitutes a narrowly tailored statute and what type of alternatives must be available for sex offenders whose social media access is restricted. This Note ultimately concludes that North Carolina’s statute is not narrowly tailored and does not leave ample alternative channels of communication. To help avoid these issues in the future, this Note concludes by suggesting a model statute for constitutionally restricting sex offenders’ social media use

Expanded View of Recidivism in Alaska

This article also appeared on pp. 6–8 of the Winter 2018 print edition.This article describes findings on recidivism over an eight-year period for individuals released from Alaska Department of Corrections facilities in 2007. These findings emerged from the Alaska Results First (RF) analysis released by Alaska Justice Information Center (AJiC) in October 2017. In general, the RF findings corroborate previous analyses which examined recidivism patterns one to three years after release, but by following offenders for eight years, AJiC is expanding our understanding of recidivism patterns in Alaska for a large group of offenders, beyond any prior study.Differences among offense-based cohorts / Least likely to recidivate: Sex offenders / Most likely to recidivate: DV [domestic violence] / DUI offenders [driving under the influence] / Felons versus misdemeanants / Conclusion / Reference

Rates of recidivism among offenders referred to Forum Sentencing

Aim: To determine whether the NSW Forum Sentencing program is more effective than the conventional sentencing process in reducing recidivism.Method: Offenders referred to Forum Sentencing in 2011 were matched with offenders who were ‘eligible’ for Forum Sentencing but who were sentenced in a NSW Local Court where Forum Sentencing was not operating. These two groups were matched on a large number of covariates using propensity score techniques and were then compared on the time to first new proven offence using Cox regression. All offenders in both groups were followed up for a minimum of 6 months after finalisation of their index offence. The analysis was conducted using an intention-to-treat research design.Results: Of the 575 offenders referred to Forum Sentencing, 552 could be matched with an ‘equivalent’ offender in the control group based on the covariates measured at the index court appearance. Cox regression analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the matched groups in the time to first new offence. This lack of an effect remained even after controlling for other relevant covariates.Conclusion: This study finds no evidence that offenders who are referred to the NSW Forum Sentencing program are less likely to re-offend than similar offenders who are dealt with through the normal sentencing process

Making an example of rioters

This article appeared on the OUP Blog Website on 25 August 2011. The final version can be accessed at the link below.In the wake of the recent riots, much attention has been given to the causes of the riots but an issue now at the forefront of press and public concern is the level of punishment being meted out to those convicted of riot-related offences. Reports of first offenders being convicted and imprisoned for thefts of items of small value have raised questions about the purposes of sentencing, the problems of giving exemplary sentences and of inconsistency, as well as the issue of political pressure on sentencers. The government has been emphasising the need for harsh punishment for riot-related offences and this has been reflected in some very severe sentences for offenders with no previous convictions, including young offenders, and where offenders have pleaded guilty

Curing America\u27s Addiction to Prisons

Our prisons have failed society because they do not, generally, provide an experience that is likely to help offenders overcome the obstacles that led them to make mistakes for which they are now being punished. Instead, they reinforce the violence and exploitation that many offenders were sentenced to prison for in the first place. They have failed because they do not promote restoration, a key to successful reintegration, and nobody benefits when offenders are more dangerous when they are released than when they entered prison. This Essay proposes that a restorative model of justice replace our failed punitive model. By changing their vision and implementing constructive reforms, policymakers can conquer an addiction that is wasting lives and billions of dollars

The BME male sex offender in prison: overrepresentation and under-participation

This paper is derived and developed from two recent papers that I prepared jointly with two colleagues (Cowburn, Lavis, &amp; Walker, 2008b; Cowburn, Lavis, &amp; Walker, 2008a). This paper uses and re-works some of this material. The paper will first present a demographic profile of the male sex offender population in the prisons of England and Wales. It will then present evidence in relation to the non-participation of the Black minority ethnic (BME) group of offenders in the Prison Service’s Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP). Following this data relating to BME sex offenders who have participated in the SOTP will also be discussed. The paper will then move onto develop a theory to understand some aspects of this non-participation and to suggest ways in which the participation of BME sex offenders in the SOTP may be encouraged and developed.</p

Black and minority ethnic sex offenders

In the past ten years or so there has been a growing concern that the treatment needs of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) sex offenders in prison are not being appropriately met. Underpinning this concern is the continued under representation of BME sex offenders on the Sex Offender Treatment Programme (SOTP). Although some research has been undertaken into how BME prisoners experience the SOTP and in to its ostensible effectiveness with BME sex offenders, little is known about why the take-up of the SOTP is poor with this group. In this paper we first consider some specific demographic issues that need to be understood in order to reflect more widely on the BME sex offender in prison. We then summarise what is currently known about effective practice with this group, thereafter we consider, in turn, current provision for BME sex offenders in England and Wales and suggestions for developing practice with this group of men. However, before we turn to these issues, it is important to consider briefly issues of terminology. Terminologies in relation to ethnicities and race are fraught with conceptual difficulties. Aspinall has highlighted the limitations of ‘pan-ethnic’ groups, such as ‘BME’; such groupings are ‘statistical collectivities’ and ‘the groups thus defined will be nothing more than meaningless statistical collectivities that do not represent any of the constituent groups within the term.’ . However, at the outset of this paper we use the collective term BME - this term is currently used by a number of Government Departments in the UK, including the Prison Service. Later we suggest that a more sophisticated understanding of ethnic cultures may be necessary to develop practice with BME sex offenders.</p

Examining adult-onset offending: a case for adult cautioning

This paper argues that extending formal police cautioning to include first-time, less serious adult-onset offenders is a cost-effective strategy that would enable scarce criminal justice resources to be redirected to provide evidence-based interventions for more serious and prolific offenders who present an ongoing risk of offending. Foreword Very little is known about adult-onset offenders. This makes it difficult to know the most effective way for the criminal justice system to respond to these offenders. This project examined the nature of adult-onset offending in the 1983–84 Queensland Longitudinal Data Cohort and explored whether adult cautioning may be a suitable and cost-effective alternative to current court processing. Half of all offenders in this cohort started offending in adulthood (between 18 and 25 years), however, most adult-onset offenders had just one or two relatively less serious officially recorded offences. The authors argue that extending formal police cautioning to include first-time, less serious adult-onset offenders is a cost-effective strategy that would enable scarce criminal justice resources to be redirected to provide evidence-based interventions for more serious and prolific offenders who present an ongoing risk of offending