Recidivism of Periodic Detainees in New Zealand
| Author | Ross E Hampton |
| DOI | 10.1177/000486587901200205 |
| Date | 01 June 1979 |
| Published date | 01 June 1979 |
AUST &NZ
JOURNAL
OF
CRIMINOLOGY
(June 1979) 12(31-36)
RECIDIVISM OF PERIODIC DETAINEES IN
NEW ZEALAND
Ross E HamptonO
Introduction
31
This
study
was
intended
to
provide
comparable
data
to
the
two
studies
carried
out
by
Gibson
and
reported
in
"Periodic
Detention
in
New
Zealand",'
which
covered
the
early
period
when
the
legislation
applied
to
youths
and
residential
centres only.
Periodic
detention
has
been
used to an increasing extent in
recent
years,
and
so
it is interesting to
see
if
the
earlier "success"
rate
is
being
maintained.
One
change has
been
the
increasing use
of
non-residential
centres
for youths.
Unfortunately
the
data
source used,
the
Police Gazette,
does
not
distinguish
residential
and
non-residential
centres
in
the
court's
sentence. This is
because
the
distinction is
made
in a
court
order
to
attend
aspecific
centre,
rather
than as a
sentence.
In addition,
the
legislation
was
extended
to
include
adults
attending
non-residential
work
centres
and
so this
report
also
provides
recidivism
data
on
adult
detainees.
For
adescription
of
periodic
detention
the
reader
is
referred
to
the earlier publication."
The
"follow-up"
period
for
re-offending
was
two
years. An exception to
the
Gibson
method
is
that
traffic
offences
are
not
included, since these
are
no longer
included in
the
Police Gazette.
The
measurement
of
recidivism is
always
problematic.
One
measure
is
the
proportion
who
arrive
in prison as a result
of
further offences. Gibson
measured
recidivism also
by
the
total
number
of
convictions in
the
follow-up period.
However
this will
not'
be
used
here
since those
sentenced
to
custody
on, say,
their first reconviction obviously do
not
have
the
opportunity
to
commit
further
offences while in custody, thus
complicating
measurement
in
terms
of a uniform
follow-up
period
for
the
sample. In
addition,
the
experience of
custody
may
alter their recidivism rate.
Other
problems
of
measurement
arise
from
the
community
based
nature
of
the sentence. Unlike imprisonment,
where
recidivism can
be
measured
from the
date
of
release,
some
persons
commit
an
offence
by
failing to
comply
with
the
periodic
detention
order,
usually
by
failing to
attend
the
centre
at
the
times
required,
and
may
receive acustodial sentence. Similarly,
some
may
commit
new
offences
before
the expiry
date
of
the
sentence.
Consequently
it is necessary
to distinguish those
who
successfully
completed
the
sentence
from
those
who
did
not,
and
this is
another
point
where
the
study
differs
from
that
by
Gibson
who
counted
both
breaches
and
new
offences
together.
oBSc, MPhil (sociology), Research section,
Department
of Justice, Wellington, NZ.
Opinions expressed
are
the author's
and
do
not
represent
official policy.
To continue reading
Request your trial