The recidivism of homicide offenders in Western Australia
| Author | Max Maller,Ross Maller,Roderic Broadhurst,Brigitte Bouhours |
| Published date | 01 September 2018 |
| Date | 01 September 2018 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0004865817722393 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology
The recidivism of homicide
2018, Vol. 51(3) 395–411
! The Author(s) 2017
offenders in Western Australia
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0004865817722393
Roderic Broadhurst and Ross Maller
journals.sagepub.com/home/anj
Australian National University, Australia
Max Maller
Curtin University of Technology, Australia
Brigitte Bouhours
University of Western Australia
Abstract
Popular perceptions about the recidivism of homicide offenders are contradictory, varying
from one extreme – that such offenders rarely commit further violent offences – to the
opposite, where it is thought that they remain at a high risk of serious reoffending.
The present study draws on the records of 1088 persons arrested in Western Australia
over the period 1984–2005 for domestic murders and other types of homicides (robbery and
sexual murder), including attempted murder, conspiracy to murder, manslaughter (uninten-
tional homicide) and driving causing death. Our database provides up to 22 years follow-up
time (for those arrested in 1984) and accounts critically for the first and any subsequent
arrests, if they occur. Of the 1088 persons, only 3 were subsequently arrested and charged
with a homicide offence event in the follow-up period. Among those arrested for a murder
and subsequently released, we estimate a probability of 0.66 (accounting for censoring) of
being rearrested for another offence of any type. The corresponding probabilities for
those originally arrested for manslaughter or for driving causing death were equal, at
0.43. A dynamic analysis of the longitudinal data by survival analysis techniques is used to
reliably estimate these probabilities. Having a prior record increased the risk of re-arrest; for
example male non-Aboriginals arrested for murder with at least one prior arrest have an
estimated probability of 0.72 of being rearrested for another offence of any type. Their
estimated probability of being rearrested for another serious offence was 0.33. These findings
should be of interest to courts and correctional agencies in assessing risk at various stages of
the administration of criminal justice.
Keywords
Homicide, recidivism, risk assessment, survival analysis
Date received: 3 February 2017; accepted: 3 July 2017
Corresponding author:
Roderic Broadhurst, Australian National University, Fellows Road, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2000,
Australia.
Email: roderic.broadhurst@anu.edu.au
396
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 51(3)
Introduction
Few serious violent crimes have as much impact on public sentiment and perceptions as
homicide, and among those no more sensational sequel can occur than for the offender
to commit another serious or lethal offence. Such extreme cases are rare but have cata-
strophic impacts on the families of victims and survivors. They also mobilize significant
police resources, and by raising the fear of crime have a particularly chilling effect on the
freedom of women. In Australia, homicide rates including manslaughter are 1.8 persons
per 100,000 population but 1 per 100,000 for intentional homicide (Australian Bureau of
Statistics, 2016).
Popular perceptions of murderers and other violent offenders often see them as indi-
viduals with high risks of serious recidivism who pose a continuing danger to society
(Davis & Dossetor, 2010). As a result, and especially given recent cases of serious
offending by prisoners released on bail or on parole – cases prominently reported in
the media – legislation to extend detention and impose intensive community supervision
has been introduced in several Australian states (Victoria [Harper Report], 2016).
On the other hand, research reviewed below suggests that such offenders seldom go
on to commit further violent offences; a significant fraction, however will re-offend.
A recurring concern for criminal justice decision makers is the need to accurately
assess the future risks posed by individual offenders and ensure community protection
from dangerous offenders. Such concerns are particularly relevant when parole and early
release decisions are made (Ogloff and Office of Correctional Service Review, 2011).
Recent studies of the reconviction of NSW parolees although limited to relatively short
follow-up times (2–3 years) and shorter sentences did show positive effects of parole in
reducing the frequency and gravity of re-offending even after controlling for possible
selection bias (Wan, Poynton, & Weatherburn, 2015; Weatherburn & Ringland, 2014).
Different approaches and systems of review are in place in each Australian state, and such
differences may bear on the readiness of authorities to cancel parole for significant
breaches of conditions (e.g. the use of illicit drugs or for re-offending). Nevertheless,
there is a need for follow-up well beyond the expiration of the parole order if accurate
estimates of re-offending, especially violent re-offending are to be obtained.
So far no Australian state correctional or parole authority has undertaken long-term
rigorous studies of the recidivism of homicide offenders. In the past, the required data
were unavailable, but the ability to undertake a comprehensive study of dangerous
offenders and to calculate the likelihood of dangerous re-offending is now within our
reach. Following the pioneering work in health-related research of the Population
Health Research Network (Boyd et al., 2012), most Australian states have the capacity
to capture the relevant information by linking electronically stored data collected by
police, courts, health and correctional agencies across time and place.
Wan and Weatherburn (2016) followed up, for an average of 6.3 years, a total of
26,472 NSW offenders born between 1986 and 1990 having had at least one arrest for a
violent offence. They estimated that 23% of this population would go on to commit a
further violent offence within 20 years. Risks of reoffending varied over some subgroups:
for example higher risks were estimated for Indigenous and younger offenders, but lit-
tle evidence of offence specialization was found. The analysis showed that it was
‘. . . possible to predict future violent offending using information which would be readily
accessible to most law enforcement agencies, courts and correctional agencies’ and
Broadhurst et al.
397
‘Authorities charged with responsibility for making bail, sentencing and parole decisions
need to pay close attention to the characteristics of violent offenders’ (Wan &
Weatherburn, 2016, p. 11).
Although some disquiet may be expressed about the holding of such extensive
information on individuals’ case histories, safeguards to privacy can be put in place
by de-identifying individual records. For example actuarial and statistical methods are
widely used in the health, insurance and finance industries to manage and analyse large
databases and anticipate risk, independent of the identification of individuals (see Boyd,
Randall, & Ferrante, 2015). Indeed, this is precisely what ‘big data’ methods promise to
provide – the opportunity to link large amounts of otherwise disparate information in
order to understand how individual histories, circumstances and events can influence
types of behaviour, such as crime or the incidence of diseases, over time.
Present study
The present study aims to provide accurate measures of the recidivism of offenders
committing homicide, a small but potentially dangerous group, drawing on the records
of persons arrested for homicide in Western Australia over the period 1984–2005. In
doing so, we are able to address the contrary anecdotal impressions that such offenders
either rarely commit further violent offences or remain high risk on release from custody.
An earlier study of re-arrest in Western Australia drawing on a population of persons
arrested (N ¼ 146,038) between 1984 and 1993 provided general estimates of recidivism
and noted significant variations associated with offence type (robbery, e.g. had a higher
proportion of recidivism than other offences), occupation, custody status, and the same
covariates – age, gender, Aboriginality and prior offending – explored here. The study
noted: ‘. . . striking increases in the risks of re-arrest, the younger the age group at arrest
and the more often arrests occurred’ (Broadhurst & Loh, 1995: 310).
The present study follows up a population of 1088 offenders arrested for homicide
during the period 1984–2005, and subsequently released from Western Australian cus-
tody. Any subsequent offending as recorded by arrest was noted. A substantial propor-
tion of re-offending cases involved dangerous driving causing death; others occurred in a
domestic context, and during other crimes such as robbery or sexual assault. We define
re-offending as re-arrest for a new offence; that is a conservative measure of re-offending.
We describe and analyse the offence type, the offender’s characteristics and the severity
of re-offending. We use a version of survival analysis adapted and successfully applied
previously in the analysis of the recidivism of Australian offenders (see Broadhurst &
Loh 2003; Broadhurst & Maller 1991, 1992; Broadhurst, Maller, Maller, & Duffecy,
1988). Before describing our data and methods a brief review of the literature on the re-
offending of homicide offenders follows.
Literature
While there is a great deal of interest in predicting and preventing lethal
and violent offending, research...
To continue reading
Request your trial