Recidivism: It's Not Open-and-Shut
Continued from page two
Sex offenders, taken as a whole, may be more "pro-social" than other types of criminals and embarrassed by people learning of their crimes, said Georgia Cumming, director of Vermont's sex offender program.
Given the widespread underreporting of sex crimes, she said, a significant number of sex offenders have likely had multiple victims by the time they finally get arrested. But she said that an arrest — and the public shame that comes with it — is for many offenders the "line in the sand."
How officials view a particular sex offender's risk of re-offending can have an impact on how much, if any, prison time he may get as well as the type of treatment program he may be required to complete.
The case of child molester Mark Hulett illustrated just how crucial the classification can be in some cases. Hulett, who knew his victim and had no previous convictions, was ranked as a low risk of re-offending in the pre-sentencing report that corrections officials performed. That designation made him ineligible at the time for in-prison treatment.
Judge Edward Cashman, however, said he believed Hulett needed treatment as soon as possible in order to not re-offend. In early January, he handed down the controversial 60-day minimum sentence, saying Hulett could then return to the community and get the treatment he needed. (Cashman later changed the minimum sentence to three years after the state announced plans to provide in-prison treatment to low-risk offenders.)
To determine the probability of offenders committing new crimes, experts use a combination of statistical models.
By those measures, sex offenders are assigned certain scores based on a number of risk factors, a method that is similar to the actuarial models long used by the insurance industry to determine, for instance, which drivers pose the biggest risk on the road.
The factors that lead to an offender being deemed "high-risk" include:
• Male victims;
• Stranger victims;
• Prior sex offenses;
• Lack of a cohabitation history with adult lovers.
"Can we perfectly predict?" said Levenson, the Florida researcher. "No, but we can do a pretty good job assessing the likelihood" of re-offending.
One state, Virginia, took into account such statistical predictions when it came up with sentencing recommendations for certain crimes. The Virginia Sentencing Commission, which proposes the optional sentencing recommendations to judges, used statistical models to predict the threat each offender poses once he or she is released.
Based on the statistical probability a sex offender will re-offend, the commission advocates increasing the recommended sentence. Under the commission's proposal, sex offenders who pose the biggest statistical risks would see their sentences triple, say, from the 10 years in the guidelines to 30 years.
|
What are your views on sexual abuse and the current drive by New Hampshire and Vermont politicians to slap sex criminals with tougher prison terms? Send your comments, in 350 words or less, by e-mail to forum@vnews.com. You may also send by fax (603-298-0212) or mail: P.O. Box 877, White River Junction, VT 05001. Please include your name, town and (for confirmation purposes only) daytime telephone number. |
Critics say Virginia judges are imprisoning people because of the probability that something might happen based on their statistical classification. Commission director Richard Kern said the statistical models give judges "tools based on research."
In both Vermont and New Hampshire, statistical models predicting offenders' risk levels can assist judges in making sentencing decisions. Experts conduct psychosexual examinations, for instance, to determine how much of a public safety risk the offenders would pose if they were to be placed on probation and receive treatment in the community.
Consider the case of Frederick Stebbins, a married, 58-year-old Quechee man who admitted recently to sexually assaulting a female minor whom he knew.
Egerton, the Lebanon clinical social worker, performed an evaluation at the request of the defense. Stebbins' scores on the statistical tests showed he has a low likelihood of re-offending, making him an appropriate candidate to receive treatment in the community, she testified in court.
Once offenders are sentenced to prison, corrections officials in both states again assess them to determine which treatment program they should participate in. The more intensive programs are reserved for the higher risk inmates.
No one claims the statistical measures are a guarantee, said Daniel Millis, the interim director of New Hampshire's sex offender treatment program. However, he said, "I think they're effective enough to give us a good idea."
And that's important, says Egerton, because most sex offenders do leave prison. Having an idea of their risk levels helps the probation and parole officers and community treatment providers get a sense of how best to help the offenders manage their risks.
"The public thinks sex offenders are terrible, lock them all up," she said. "But you can't afford to do that."
May not be reprinted without permission