A review of restorative justice responses to offending

Restorative justice has been enthusiastically embraced in many justice systems as an alternative to incarceration for young adult and Indigenous offenders. But how well does it work? Abstract The present review sought to determine on the available evidence (a) whether restorative justice (RJ) is an effective means of reducing re-offending, (b) what benefits victims of crime obtain from participation in the RJ process, (c) whether the public supports the principles of RJ, and (d) how the cost and efficiency of RJ proceedings compare with conventional courts in cost and efficiency (i.e. time taken to finalize cases). The review finds little reliable evidence that RJ reduces re-offending. Victims who participate in RJ are generally satisfied with the experience but it is unclear whether they are more satisfied than victims in similar cases that are dealt with in court. The limited evidence available suggests that the public supports the principles of RJ. It appears to be a less expensive and more efficient way of finalizing criminal cases involving young people but, once again, the evidence on this issue at this stage is rather limited. Evidence Base, issue 1, 201

The decline in robbery and theft: inter-state comparisons

This paper finds that the national decline in robbery and theft offences is partly due to a reduction in heroin use and partly due to improvements in the economy, but that other factors are likely to have also played a role.Aim: To describe and discuss inter-jurisdictional trends in police-recorded robbery and theft offences.Method: Rates of recorded robbery and theft per head of population are calculated for each Australian jurisdiction from 1994/1995 to 2012. Rates of recorded robbery are disaggregated into armed and unarmed robbery. Rates of recorded theft are disaggregated into burglary, motor vehicle theft and other theft.Results: In most jurisdictions, trends in recorded robbery and theft offences rose during the late 1990s, peaked around 2001 and then fell from 2001 to 2012. Between 2001 and 2009, recorded rates of robbery offences in Australia fell by 49.1 per cent, recorded rates of burglary fell by 57.3 per cent, recorded rates of motor vehicle theft fell by 62.2 per cent and recorded rates of other theft fell by 39.3 per cent.Conclusion: The national decline in robbery and theft offences is partly due to a reduction in heroin use and partly due to improvements in the economy but other factors are likely to have also played a role. Research into the causes of the fall in crime is hampered by the absence of any regional breakdown in national recorded crime statistics

The great property crime drop: a regional analysis

Aim: To describe and discuss regional variation between parts of NSW in the rate at which theft and robbery offences have fallen. Method: Percentage changes in rates of offending in robbery and various categories of theft were calculated for the period 2000 to 2012. Changes in the extent to which rates of crime across areas have become more similar were quantified by comparing the standard deviation in crime rates across areas in 2000 to the standard deviation in crime rates in 2012. Product moment calculations were used to measure (a) the extent to which areas with high crime rates in 2000 also had high crime rates in 2012 and (b) the extent to which areas with the highest crime rates in 2000 had the largest falls in crime in 2012. Results: The fall in property crime and robbery across NSW between 2000 and 2012 has been very uneven; being much larger in Sydney and other urban areas than in rural areas. The fall in theft offence rates ranges from 62 per cent in the Sydney Statistical Division (SD) to 5.9 per cent in the Northern SD. Similarly, the fall in robbery rates ranges from 70.8 per cent in the Sydney SD to 21.9 per cent in the Northern SD. In some areas some offences actually increased. The Murray, Northern, Murrumbidgee, North Western, Hunter and Central West SDs, for example, all experienced an increase in steal from a retail store. Conclusion: State Plan performance measures for improvements in public safety should take into account regional changes in rates of offending as well as changes in the overall volume of offending

The impact of intensive correction orders on re-offending

This study examined the risk of re-offending of those who received an intensive correction order, relative to those who received periodic detention and suspended sentences with supervision. Method: Details of offenders’ demographic and offence characteristics, prior convictions and penalties received, and re-offences were extracted from the Re-offending Database maintained by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Using propensity score modelling, offenders who received an ICO as a principal penalty in a NSW court between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2012 were matched to two comparable groups of offenders who received periodic detention between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2009 and suspended sentences with supervision between 1 October 2010 and 30 September 2012. A supplementary comparison with those who received suspended sentences with supervision included matching on Level of Service Inventory - Revised (LSI-R) assessment scores, in addition to demographic and offending characteristics. Time to first re-offence was estimated using the Nelson-Aalen estimator of the cumulative hazard rate function and compared between groups using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: An offender on an ICO had 33 per cent less risk of re-offending than an offender on periodic detention (HR=0.67, 95% confidence interval (0.55, 0.83), p<.001). There was no significant difference in re-offending between those who received ICOs and supervised suspended sentences after taking into account LSI-R assessment scores. Conclusion: There is some evidence to suggest that ICOs are more effective than periodic detention in terms of re-offending rates. However, future evaluations should include more detailed offender, treatment and program participation information in order to better understand any observed differences between comparison groups

Trial court delay and the NSW District Criminal Court

Summary Between 2007 and 2014 trial delay in the NSW District Criminal Court increased 34% for defendants on bail and 44% for those on remand.  In 2014 the pending caseload had increased to 1716 trials. This reports finds these results to be due to increases in the volume of matters coming into the District Court, the proportion of matters committed to trial that proceed to trial and the duration of trials (i.e. number of hearing days). Aim: To describe the growth in trial court delay in the NSW District Criminal Court and the factors affecting it. Method: Descriptive analysis of court data. Results: Where the accused is on bail, the average time between committal for trial and case finalisation in the NSW District Criminal Court has grown by 34 per cent since 2007. Where the accused is in custody, the average time between committal for trial and case finalisation has grown by 44 per cent. The principal causes of the growth in delay are (1) a growth in persons arrested for serious (strictly indictable) offences, (2) an increase in the proportion of cases registered for trial that are actually proceeding to trial and (3) a growth in trial duration. Conclusion: Action needs to be taken to reduce court delay in the NSW District Criminal Court and to improve the indicators of trial case processing. Measures that expand the Court\u27s capacity or improve its efficiency will have a more immediate (though not necessarily larger) effect than measures that reduce demand for trial court time

The effect of suspended sentences on imprisonment

This study finds that although suspended sentences were introduced as an alternative to prison, in New South Wales they appear to have had the opposite effect. Abstract Aim: To see whether the introduction of suspended sentences reduced the number of offenders receiving a fulltime sentence of imprisonment. Method: The number of persons receiving a prison sentence was regressed against the number receiving a suspended sentence while controlling for changes in the total number of proven offenders and the monthly variability using multiple linear regression with ARIMA errors. The data set used for the analysis consisted of the monthly number of persons imprisoned, persons given a suspended sentence and proven offenders from January 2002 to December 2013. Results: Every 10 additional offenders given suspended sentences was associated with an extra 3-4 offenders sent to prison. Conclusion: Although suspended sentences were introduced as an alternative to prison, they appear to have had the opposite effect

Re-offending on parole

This study finds that offending on parole is less common than previous studies have suggested. Abstract Aim: To measure the rate of re-offending on parole and identify the predictors of both general and violent offending on parole. To describe the types of offences committed on parole. Method: The analysis was based on 9,604 offenders released on parole in 2010 or 2011. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify demographic and criminal history characteristics independently associated with re-offending or re-imprisonment while on parole. Results: Just under 61 per cent (60.8%) of parolees neither re-offended nor were re-imprisoned during their parole period. About twenty-eight per cent (28.4%) of the sample re-offended on parole. A further 10.8 per cent were re-imprisoned on parole without having first re-offended. Approximately 7 per cent (7.1%) of the sample committed a violent offence on parole. Parolees were more likely to offend on parole if they were male; Indigenous; young; had spent less than 180 days in prison (during the current episode); had a higher Level of Service Inventory - Revised score had a non drug offence as their principal offence; had six or more prior court appearances, had been imprisoned before; or had a prior conviction for drug use and/or possession. The correlates of violent re-offending on parole were very similar but also included prior conviction for a serious violent offence. Those who re-offended on parole committed a broad spectrum of offences, including: break and enter, assault, possess illicit drugs, receive/handle proceeds of crime, drive while licence disqualified, breach apprehended violence order and property damage. Conclusion: Offending on parole is less common than previous studies have suggested. Future research should focus on three issues: whether it is possible to improve the accuracy of the parole risk assessment process; whether post release supervision/support reduces the risk of re-offending following release from prison; and whether offenders released to parole are less likely to re-offend if released to parole by the State Parole Authority than if released on parole by a court

Young but not so restless: trends in the age-specific rate of offending

Aim: To describe and discuss trends in age-specific rates of offending for property crime, robbery and serious assault. Method: Descriptive statistics and graphical displays. Results: The number of people apprehended by police for property crime and robbery has fallen sharply since around 2001 and is much lower now than it was 15 years ago. The decline has been most pronounced among adolescent and young adult offenders (aged 15-20 years). The rate at which people in this age group were apprehended for robbery first rose and fell between 1995 and 2004 and then rose and fell (again) between 2005 and 2012. The rate at which 21-24 year olds were apprehended for robbery declined between 1999 and 2012. A similar but less pronounced pattern is seen for 25-29 year olds. The rate at which people were apprehended for serious assault remained fairly stable for all age groups up until around 2003. Thereafter the rate rose rapidly for 15-20 year olds, peaking at around 2008 and then falling from 2009 to 2012. The rate at which older age groups have been apprehended by police for assault remained fairly steady since 1999 but over the last three years has slowly declined. Conclusion: It is impossible to be certain but there is good reason to expect a continuation of the downward trend in rates of property crime and robbery in NSW. The future course of trends in serious assault will likely depend on whether the current fall in alcohol misuse by young people continues

Why is the NSW prison population growing?

This paper provides a preliminary analysis of the rapid rise in the NSW prison population from January 2013 to March 2014. Method: Descriptive analysis of court, crime, arrest and correctional data, and ARIMA modelling of prison trends. Results: The key factors responsible for the recent rise in the NSW prison population appear to be a higher rate of arrest for serious crime and an increase in the proportion of convicted offenders given a prison sentence. There is no evidence that prisoners during 2013 are spending longer in custody but there is evidence the length of stay in custody may increase over the coming year. If the current trend in inmate numbers continues, the NSW prison population will rise by another 17 per cent (i.e., to about 12,500 inmates) by March 2015. Conclusion: Early consideration should be given to measures that reduce the demand for prison accommodation and/or expand prison capacity

The 2015 NSW prison population forecast

Prison population forecasting is fraught with difficulty. Many factors affect the size of the prison population, including levels of crime, the number of arrests, the proportion of arrestees convicted, the proportion refused bail, the proportion given a prison sentence, the average length of prison sentences, the proportion of offenders released to parole at the end of their non-parole period and the rate at which parole is revoked. This report provides short and long-term forecasts of the number of prisoners in NSW. Three long-term forecasts are provided; one of which assumes no further growth in age-specific rates of imprisonment, and another two of which assume a continuation of the growth that has occurred either over the last ten years or over the history of available data (32 years), respectively. In order to provide some context for the forecasts we begin by describing long-term trends in the remand and sentenced prisoner numbers and some of the factors that have influenced growth in these populations. Results: The short-term forecast is that, if relevant influences remain unchanged, NSW will have 12,191 prisoners by March 2017. If age-specific rates of imprisonment remain constant, we expect the NSW prison population to rise to 12,500 by June 2036. If age-specific rates of imprisonment rise in a manner commensurate with trends observed over the past decade, the prison population should reach 15,600 by June 2036. If age-specific imprisonment rates rise according to the trends observed since 1982, the prison population should reach 17,600 by June 2036. Conclusion: The NSW prison population is likely to rise over both the short and long-term unless measures are taken to reduce the demand for prison accommodation. &nbsp