Group items tagged

The total sex-related recidivism rate, including technical violations of supervision conditions, was 11.0%. Sex offenders who returned for a new sex related offense did so within a few years of release. Of all the sex offenders who came back to an Ohio prison for a new sex offense, one half did so within two years, and two-thirds within three years. Paroled Sex offenders completing basic sex offender programming (level 1) while incarcerated appeared to have a somewhat lower recidivism rate than those who did not have programming. This was true both for recidivism of any type (33.9% with programming recidivated compared with 55.3% without programming) and sex-related recidivism (7.1% with programming recidivated compared with 16.5% without programming).

The 2004 Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy to analyze the impact and effectiveness of current sex offender sentencing policies. Because the topic is extensive, we are publishing a series of reports. This report describes the recidivism rates of Washington State sex offenders. It examines the 4,091 sex offenders placed in the community from 1994 to 1998 after release from prison or jail or a community supervision sentence. Typically, news articles report sex offender recidivism with one number. This study examines recidivism from multiple perspectives, looking at the type of sex offender (child victim, rapist, sex offender with priors) and the categories of crimes after release (sex, violent, non-violent, misdemeanor). This study defines recidivism as a conviction occurring during the first five years after release to the community. In addition, the time between the date of a recidivism offense and the conviction for that offense-the adjudication period-is taken into account. Our previous work indicates that a one-year adjudication period captures nearly all convictions.

Recidivism Rates Compared, 2005 - 2007, is the first comprehensive report published by the Indiana Department of Correction that details the recidivism rates of offenders released from incarceration in Indiana. This report presents recidivism rates for offenders released from the custody of the Indiana Department of Correction for the time period 2002 through 2004. This report defines recidivism as a return to incarceration in the Indiana Department of Correction within three years of the offenders release date. For example, offenders released in calendar year 2004, who returned to prison for either a new conviction or technical violation during 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007, but within three years of release, would be counted in the recidivism rate for 2007.

The Indiana Department of Correction's mission statement is "to empower the agency's staff of correctional professionals to increase public safety and reduce recidivism through successful re-entry programs that allow offenders the opportunity to positively contribute to Indiana communities." Since I was appointed in January 2005 by Governor Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., the Department of Correction has strived to accomplish the goals outlined in our agencies mission statement. Governor Daniels has charged me with increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department, and to that end, there is no better indicator of the success of this Department than the reduction in the return rates of offenders who are released from our custody. The rate at which an offender returns to incarceration after being committed and released from the Department of Correction is referenced throughout this report as Recidivism. Recidivism is the ultimate measurable when we want to identify the extent to which we are improving an offender's life and subsequently increasing public safety.

This study examined the recidivism rates of female sexual offenders. A meta-analysis of 10 studies (2,490 offenders; average follow-up 6.5 years) showed that female sexual offenders have extremely low rates of sexual recidivism (less than 3%). The recidivism rates for violent (including sexual) offences and for any type of crime were predictably higher than the recidivism rates for sexual offences but still lower than the recidivism rates of male sexual offenders. These findings indicate the need for distinct policies and procedures for assessing and managing the risk of male and female sexual offenders. Risk assessment tools developed specifically for male sexual offenders would be expected to substantially overestimate the recidivism risk of female sexual offenders.

Original ArticleWhen looking at sex crimes, recidivism should be defined as committing another sex crime, not just any crime or technical violation, then the recidivism rate would be even lower.10/27/2012By Laura SmithGREEN BAY - Prisoners at Gr...

Sex offenders make up 6.5 percent of parolees, and have a lower recidivism rate than other offenders. Five percent of released sex offenders who recidivate are convicted of a sex offense, 8.6 percent commit an unrelated crime and 86 percent return to prison on a parole violation. San Francisco has one of the highest recidivism rates in the state-some 78.3 percent go back to prison within three years of release-according to a report released today by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). The study tracked about 108,000 inmates released from state prisons between 2005 and 2006 over the course of three years. Overall, the state recidivism rate, which has long been among the highest in the country, clocks in at 67.5 percent, which is not a significant change from previous statewide tallies.

A recent study of sexual offenders released from incarceration in Alaska shows that for the three years after the offenders left prison in 2001, the rates of recidivism for sexual offenders were, by most measures, no higher than for offenders in general. The study, which was done by the Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Center, a subdivision of the Justice Center, compared recidivism for sexual offenders released from prison in 2001 with a random sample of non-sex offenders also released in 2001. The analysis used the three measures most commonly used to determine recidivism: incidents of remand to custody, rearrest, and reconviction on any new offense. The results are similar to those found in an earlier study done by the Alaska Judicial Council. (See Alaska Felony Process: 1999, Alaska Judicial Council, 2004.)

Sex Offender Recidivism Rates Accurately measuring the rate at which sex offenders recidivate is difficult. Most studies that attempt to measure recidivism equate ...

Title: Sex Offender Risk and Recidivism in Florida - 2012 Excerpt: Sex Offender Risk and Recidivism in Florida Page 1 Elizabeth Letourneau, Co This Multi-State project was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Justice

The public's panic about the fear of recidivism if adjudicated sex offenders are ever to be released to the community has not subsided, despite the growing amount of information and statistically-reliable data signifying a generally low risk of re-offense. The established case law upholding sex offender civil commitment and containment statutes has rejected challenges of unconstitutionality, and continues to be dominated by punitive undertones. We have come to learn that the tools used to assess offenders for risk and civil commitment are often inaccurate and that meaningful treatment for this population is often unavailable and ineffective. Yet, society continues to clamor for legislation confining this cohort of offenders for "treatment," and, ostensibly, protection of the community, and legislatures respond quickly to these calls. This "reform legislation" often includes strict and demeaning post-release restrictions that track offenders and curb their integration into society. These "reforms" continue to show no benefit either to the public or to the individual offender. The absence of meaningful and effective treatment during confinement, combined with inhumane conditions upon release, make it far less likely that this cohort of individuals will ever become productive members of society. Only through therapeutic jurisprudence, a focus on rehabilitation, and a dedication to treating sexual offenders humanely, will it be possible to reduce recidivism and foster successful community reintegration.

The public's panic about the fear of recidivism if adjudicated sex offenders are ever to be released to the community has not subsided, despite the growing amount of information and statistically-reliable data signifying a generally low risk of re-offense. The established case law upholding sex offender civil commitment and containment statutes has rejected challenges of unconstitutionality, and continues to be dominated by punitive undertones. We have come to learn that the tools used to assess offenders for risk and civil commitment are often inaccurate and that meaningful treatment for this population is often unavailable and ineffective. Yet, society continues to clamor for legislation confining this cohort of offenders for "treatment," and, ostensibly, protection of the community, and legislatures respond quickly to these calls. This "reform legislation" often includes strict and demeaning post-release restrictions that track offenders and curb their integration into society. These "reforms" continue to show no benefit either to the public or to the individual offender. The absence of meaningful and effective treatment during confinement, combined with inhumane conditions upon release, make it far less likely that this cohort of individuals will ever become productive members of society. Only through therapeutic jurisprudence, a focus on rehabilitation, and a dedication to treating sexual offenders humanely, will it be possible to reduce recidivism and foster successful community reintegration.

In recent decades, sex offenders have been the targets of some of the most far-reaching and novel crime legislation in the U.S. Two key innovations have been registration and notification laws which, respectively, require that convicted sex offenders provide valid contact information to law enforcement authorities, and that information on sex offenders be made public. Using detailed information on the timing and scope of changes in state law, we study how registration and notification affect the frequency of sex offenses and the incidence of offenses across victims, and we check for any change in police response to reported crimes. We find evidence that registration reduces the frequency of sex offenses by providing law enforcement with information on local sex offenders. As we predict from a simple model of criminal behavior, this decrease in crime is concentrated among "local" victims (e.g., friends, acquaintances, neighbors), while there is little evidence of a decrease in crimes against strangers. We also find evidence that community notification deters crime, but in a way unanticipated by legislators. Our results suggest that community notification deters first-time sex offenders, but may increase recidivism by registered offenders by increasing the relative attractiveness of criminal behavior. This finding is consistent with work by criminologists showing that notification may contribute to recidivism by imposing social and financial costs on registered sex offenders and, as a result, making non-criminal activity relatively less attractive. We regard this latter finding as potentially important, given that the purpose of community notification is the reduction of recidivism.

In 1994, prisons in 15 States released 9,691 male sex offenders. The 9,691 men are two-thirds of all the male sex offenders released from State prisons in the United States in 1994. This report summarizes findings from a survey that tracked the 9,691 for 3 full years after their release. The report documents their "recidivism," as measured by rates of rearrest, reconviction, and reimprisonment during the 3-year followup period. This report gives recidivism rates for the 9,691 combined total. It also separates the 9,691 into four overlapping categories and gives recidivism rates for each category: - 3,115 released rapists - 6,576 released sexual assaulters - 4,295 released child molesters - 443 released statutory rapists. The 9,691 sex offenders were released from State prisons in these 15 States: Arizona, Maryland, North Carolina, California, Michigan, Ohio, Delaware, Minnesota, Oregon, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, Illinois, New York, and Virginia.

As interest and concern over sex offenders has increased, so have efforts to control the extent to which they reoffend. As a result, the State of Minnesota has enforced civil commitment statutes, created a sex offender registry, implemented community notification, enhanced the penalties for sex offenders, and increased both the intensity and length of post-release supervision. In examining recidivism among 3,166 sex offenders released from a Minnesota Correctional Facility (MCF) between 1990 and 2002, this report addresses the following question: What are the factors associated with sex offender recidivism?

Title: Five Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of Sex Offender Releases Excerpt: Five Year Recidivism Follow-Up Of Sex Offender Releases George V. Voinovich, Governor Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Reginald A. Wilkinson Thomas J ...

Title: An Analysis of Risk Factors Contributing to the Recidivism of ... Excerpt: Most studies of sex offender recidivism are studies of only those persons released from prison or prison-based treatment programs (Barbaree, Seto,

In April 2007, the Minnesota Department of Corrections1 (DOC) published results of a study on 3,166 sex offenders who were released from the state's correctional facilities between 1990 and 2003. Recidivism measures included new arrests, new convictions, and incarceration for new offenses that occurred in Minnesota. This report draws upon the data collected by the DOC, but focuses solely on the sexual recidivism rates2 of the 970 adult sex offenders who were placed under Hennepin County's supervision when released from prison between 1990 and 2003. It is important to bear in mind that during the study's lengthy follow-up period significant changes occurred in how the criminal justice system manages sex offenders. Beginning in the late 1980's, public outcry resulting from high profile sex crimes prompted the enactment of stricter laws and tighter supervision guidelines. For example, risk levels (Level 3, 2, or 1) were not assigned to sex offenders until 1997.

The Indiana Department of Correction (IDOC) defines recidivism as a return to incarceration within three years of the offender's date of release from a state correctional institution. A recent study by the IDOC calculated the 2008 recidivism rate for offenders released from IDOC during 2005.

Original Article Remember, recidivism (in most studies) means the conviction for another crime, or technicality, not necessarily another sex crime. If they only considered new sex crimes, then the rates would be even lower. 09/21/2013 We read with... Original ArticleRemember, recidivism (in most studies) means the conviction for another crime, or technicality, not necessarily another sex crime. If they only considered new sex crimes, then the rates would be even lower.09/21/2013 We read with...