Culture of Control

Current culture

• Current trend in CJ - tougher laws, harsher punishment

• Garland (2001) states that this trend is the result of the late modernity culture.

Garland (2001)

• The public want safety => there are many options to respond them => politicians choose easy way to satisfy the public => harsher punishment => enhance social exclusion and “us” vs. “them”

Garland (2001)

• The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contempo-rary Society (2001)

• The public demands:Something should be done about crimesTheir property and persons should be protectedOffenders should be adequately punished and controlledThe CJ system should be operated reliably and effectively Þ These demands could be met in a variety of ways. Public atti-

tudes about crime and control are ambivalent. They leave room for other resolutions

=>Politicians take the easy route, to opt for segregation and punishment rather than try to embed social controls, regu-late economic life, and develop policies that will enhance so-cial inclusion and integration

In short, Garland (2001)

• The contemporary harsher punish-ment could be explained as the re-sult of the public’s need to be safe and politicians’ easy response to it.

The characteristics of late-modern society, Kraska (2001)

• Economic globalization• Dominance of free-market model• Increasing cultural diversity• Rise in bureaucratic surveillance• Preoccupation with safety• Changing conception of gender• Rapid advancement of high technology• An omnipresent media……

Key Themes

• Actuarial Justice• The Socially Exclusive Society: us vs. them, gated community

Actuarial Justice

• This is the most common theme dis-cussed in the late modern literature.

• New Penology• Actuary

Things Changed

• From • modern notions: equity, individualized justice,

rights-based processes, and reacting to violations of law

• To• Late modern emphasis: efficiency, minimizing risk,

targeting hot-spots of potential danger, prevention

• “Growth orientation” also concerned itself with the rise of “actuarial justice”.

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Paradigm shifts in criminal jus-tice

States Using Parole Prediction Instruments

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

Sta

tes

Us

ing

Pre

dic

tio

n T

oo

l

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Standard Actuarial Tools

• Psychopathy Checklist-Re-vised (PCL-R)

• Violence Risk Appraisal Guide (VRAG)

• Sex Offender Risk Ap-praisal Guide (SORAG)

• Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R)

• Historical Clinical Risk Scheme (HCR-20)

• Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale (SIR)

• Salient Factor Score (SFS-81)

• Base Expectancy Score (BES)

• Static 99

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

The Span of Actuarial Prediction in Criminal Justice

• Dangerousness prediction comes into play in a range of criminal justice deci-sions:– Pretrial release decisions– Juvenile transfers to adult court– Sentencing– Civil commitment– Correctional classification and management– Capital sentencing – Correctional treatment– Parole/offender reentry

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

The Level of Service Inventory-Re-vised (LSI-R) – Versions and Offshoots

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

LSI-R Items and Scoring

• LSI-R is scored on a 0-54 Point Scale:– 41+ = high risk/

need– 34-40 = medium

risk/need– 24-33 = moderate

risk/need– 14-23 = low/mod-

erate risk/need– 0-13 = low risk/

need.

• LSI-R Items– Criminal History (10)– Education/Employment

(10)– Financial (2)– Family/Marital (4)– Accomodation (3)– Leisure/Recreation (2)– Companions (5)– Alcohol/Drug Problems

(9)

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

The PCL-R --Versions and Off-shoots

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Psychopathy and Violence• Psychopathy and violence are so inextricably

linked that psychopathy has been described as a “mini theory of crime.”

• Psychopathy is of practical importance in the pre-diction of dangerousness because the association between psychopathy is so (statistically) large.

• Features of psychopathy that virtually ensure vio-lence include:– Cognitive distortions and/or defect– Defect in affect– (Instrumental) Impulsivity

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

The PCL-R

• 20 Characteristics consisting of:– Factor 1 (Personality/Aggressive Narcis-

sism)– Factor 2 (Behavior/ Antisocial Lifestyle)

• Recent studies using Item Response Theory suggests 3 factors:– Interpersonal– Affective– Lifestyle

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

The PCL-R Factors 1 & 2

• Factor 1– Glibness/Superficial charm – Grandiose sense of self-worth – Pathological lying– Conning/manipulative– Lack of remorse or guilt– Shallow affect– Callous/lack of empathy– Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

• Factor 2– Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom– Parasitic lifestyle– Poor behavioral controls– Early behavior problem– Impulsivity– Irresponsibility– Juvenile delinquency– Revocation of conditional release

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Items not included in factors

–Many short-term marital relationships– Criminal versatility– Promiscuous sexual behavior– Lack of realistic, long-term goals

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Administering and Scoring the PCL-R

• Each of the 20 items is scored on a 0 to 2 point scale based on interviews and case file infor-mation: – 0 indicates the item does not apply, that the in-

dividual does not exhibit the characteristic or exhibits opposite characteristics

– 1 indicates that the item applies to a certain ex-tent, but not to the degree necessary to score a 2 because of too many exceptions or doubts

– 2 indicates that the item applies and shows a good match in essential respects.

– In cases where there is not enough information to confidently score a particular item, the item is omitted, and the total score prorated.

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

What do PCL-R scores mean?

• ≥ 30 = primary/“true” psychopath• 20-29 = secondary psychopath/

APD• < 20 = nonpsychopath

JB Helfgott, PhD/Dept of Criminal Justice/Seattle University

Another way of looking at it . . .

TRUE POSITIVE “Hit”

FALSE POSITIVE“Miss”

FALSE NEGATIVE“Miss”

TRUE NEGATIVE“Hit”

PRE-DICTED OUTCOME

ACTUAL OUT-COMEViolent Nonviolent

“Safe”Low Risk

“Danger-ous”

High Risk

Discussion

• What is the problem of Ac-tuarial Justice?

• Do you support prediction pun-ishment?