Sex Offenders: Recidivism & Collateral Consequences

March 2012 New Jersey:

Abstract:

This report examines the efficacy of sex offender registration and notification (SORN) through its influence on sex offender recidivism and collateral consequences. The first study examines the recidivism rates of two samples of sex offenders, those released prior to SORN and a sample released under SORN in New Jersey. It asks whether or not there are distinct risk profiles among sex offenders with regard to their recidivism trajectories, and if these profiles are similar or different for sex offenders pre- and post- SORN. Additional analyses also include an examination of the influence of demographics, substance abuse, mental health issues, treatment history, sex offense incident characteristics, and criminal history on recidivism trajectories. The second study looks at whether the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN sex offenders are similar to or different from the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN non-sex offenders who are released from prison via parole. It also specifically focuses on whether or not a series of collateral consequences are experienced similarly or differently among these post-SORN sex and post-SORN non-sex offender parolees.

Recidivism data for both studies in this report were obtained through the New Jersey State Police Computerized Criminal History System and the National Crime Information Center’s Interstate Identification Unit. The first study utilizes two samples of sex offenders, and each was provided by the New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC). The pre-SORN group included a random sample of 250 male sex offenders released from prison by the NJDOC during the years 1990-1994, while the post-implementation group utilized the same sampling procedure and size and matched according to relevant demographics (age, race, and criminal history), with the exception that they were released during the years 1995-1999. For the second study, random samples of 247 post-SORN sex offenders and 250 post-SORN non-sex offenders released from prison in New Jersey via parole during 1995-1999 were drawn from the New Jersey Department of Corrections’ databases. The samples in both studies were followed for approximately eight years post-release for assessing recidivism. For both studies, official records of re-arrest for new offenses were employed as the measure of recidivism. Semi-parametric trajectory modeling was also used in both studies to estimate the recidivism trajectories of the pre- and post-SORN releasees, and the recidivism trajectories of the post-SORN sex offender and the non-sex offender releasees.

The first study finds that there are limited observable benefits of SORN regarding sex offender recidivism and general recidivism. With an overall low rate of sex offense recidivism, SORN status (e.g. whether an offender is or is not subject to SORN) failed to predict whether sex offenders would reoffend sexually. The results are consistent with previous research which has argued that sex offenders have relatively low rates of recidivism, typically significantly lower than non-sex offenders. SORN status was also not a significant predictor of which sex offenders would reoffend in general, including non-sexual recidivism. Although sex offenders and non-sex offenders share the experience of collateral consequences, results from the second study reveal that several collateral consequences including not living with friends, living in group facilities, and residential relocation appear to differentially impact sex offenders.

Policy makers and treatment providers should focus their efforts on those sex offenders identified as belonging to the high-risk trajectory with a particular interest in targeting the risk factors related to a high-risk trajectory. A targeted rather than universal application of SORN seems a viable alternative. Ultimately, the two studies in this report suggest that SORN is not likely to be an effective deterrent for sex offender recidivism and may produce an environment with specific collateral consequences that inhibit reintegration efforts post-prison release for sex offenders. ..Source.. by Richard Tewksbury, Ph.D. University of Louisville and Wesley G. Jennings, Ph.D. University of South Florida and Kristen Zgoba, Ph.D. New Jersey Department of Corrections

Recidivism Rates of Sexual Offenders up to 7 Years Later Does Treatment Matter?

2005 New Jersey:

Abstract
This article critically reviews the evidence on sex offender treatment and subsequently provides new estimates on short-term recidivism among sexual offenders released from prison in New Jersey.

The sample of male sex offenders is drawn from the Adult Diagnostic Treatment Center (ADTC), New Jersey’s only sex-offender-specific prison, and the general population of nine prisons within the state of New Jersey.

The ADTC sample receives treatment while incarcerated (n = 495), whereas no treatment is provided to the offenders in the general population sample (n = 223). Overall, 33% of the total sample (N = 718) commits a new offense. Of the total sample, 14% commits a new sexual offense and 24% commits a new nonsexual offense.

Significant differences exist between the ADTC and the general population samples with respect to nonsexual reoffending only. In the final analysis, treatment appears to matter in terms of a reduction in recidivism but not in conventionally expected ways. ..Source.. by Kristen M. Zgoba1 and Leonore M. J. Simon

SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT, TREATMENT, AND CIVIL COMMITMENT: AN EVIDENCE BASED ANALYSIS AIMED AT REDUCING SEXUAL VIOLENCE

9-25-2013:

Executive Summary:

This study was designed to provide a comprehensive exploratory examination of the program management, treatment, and recidivism of sexual offenders in New Jersey. There were four main objectives of the research: 1) To provide normative data on a large sample of New Jersey sex offenders; 2) To determine which sex offenders get selected for treatment and what criteria are used to make that decision; 3) To examine the effect of treatment on recidivism; and 4) To compare those offenders selected for commitment as a Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) with those offenders not selected for commitment.

Data were gathered from the archival records of 3,168 male sex offenders who were housed at either a prison-based sex offender treatment facility (treatment group) or any of the New Jersey State prisons (no treatment group) and released from custody between the years 1996 and 2007. Additionally, archival data were gathered from all detained or committed SVPs. Federal and state recidivism data were obtained for all released offenders.

Ultimately, three general outcome categories were the focus of the analyses: selection for treatment (determined by whether the offender was housed at the prison-based sex offender treatment facility), recidivism (determined by whether an offender was convicted of an additional offense—sexual or non-sexual—following release), and SVP commitment (determined by whether the offender was released or civilly committed upon completion of the index sentence).

After coding the archival file data for offender characteristics, offense characteristics, risk assessment outcomes, and recidivism (and what type of recidivism, if applicable), comparisons were made via chi-square analysis and independent samples t-test across these three outcomes; that is, we compared treated and non-treated offenders, recidivists and non-recidivists, and committed and not-committed offenders on these factors.

Additionally, a series of classification tree analyses and logistic regressions were conducted to gather insight into what factors were most strongly indicative of selection for treatment, SVP commitment, and recidivism. ..Source.. by Cynthia Calkins Mercado, PI -and- Elizabeth Jeglic, PI -and- Keith Markus, Co-PI -and- R. Karl Hanson, Consultant -and- Jill Levenson, Consultant