Recidivism of Paroled Murderers

Key Question Being Explored in This Insight:

John Anderson discusses how the Australian and international recidivism literature is synthesised in the specific context of murderers released to parole.

View the page of: John Anderson

Institution: University of Newcastle

Explore more insights in:

Criminal Law Law Professional

Media Literacy Toolkit

Faculti's Media Literacy Toolkit helps viewers critically engage with academic insights by analyzing the research context, identifying perspectives, and encouraging thoughtful evaluation.

Critical Questions to Consider ▼

What assumptions does the research make?
Are there alternative perspectives not explored?
What are the limitations of the research method?

Bias and Perspective Awareness ▼

This research comes from University of Newcastle . Reflect on how the institution's academic focus and research partnerships may shape the questions being explored.

Further Reading ▼

Read the Study

John Anderson discusses how the Australian and international recidivism literature is synthesised in the specific context of murderers released to parole.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 14, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the author's extensive research on life imprisonment, particularly focusing on the recidivism rates of murderers who have been released on parole after serving time. The author argues that life imprisonment, especially without parole, serves primarily as a punitive measure rather than a rehabilitative one, often leading to a perception of absolute retribution for offenders.

The author highlights findings from various studies indicating that the recidivism rates for homicide offenses among released murderers are very low, typically ranging from 1% to 3%. While some studies report higher overall recidivism rates when including minor offenses, the author emphasizes that violent re-offending and repeat homicides are extremely rare.

This video video also addresses the difficulties in accurately predicting which offenders pose a future risk to society, suggesting a need for improved tools to assess the dangerousness of inmates over time. The conclusion argues against the absolute nature of life sentences without parole, suggesting that such sentences may deny individuals the chance to rehabilitate and reintegrate into society, thus potentially serving a disservice to both the offenders and the community. Ultimately, the author calls for reconsideration of the utility of life imprisonment without parole, advocating for a balanced approach that considers rehabilitation alongside community safety.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.145 --> 00:03.605
The context for the study is a broader

00:04.285 --> 00:08.205
research context in which I've been studying the sentence

00:08.205 --> 00:10.805
of life imprisonment since I completed my PhD

00:11.835 --> 00:12.925
over 20 years ago.

00:13.545 --> 00:17.165
Um, so it's been an ongoing, study

00:17.465 --> 00:19.805
and there have been different aspects to it.

00:19.865 --> 00:23.645
So this current study relates to,

00:24.635 --> 00:27.285
looking at doing a qualitative analysis

00:27.465 --> 00:30.565
and, a of different studies

00:30.595 --> 00:33.045
that have been conducted in relation to recidivism

00:33.585 --> 00:37.525
of murderers who have been released to parole,

00:38.955 --> 00:40.765
when sentenced to life imprisonment,

00:40.905 --> 00:44.885
but being allowed to be released, the sentence

00:44.885 --> 00:46.405
of life imprisonment itself.

00:46.865 --> 00:50.205
Um, when I completed my PhD research

00:50.205 --> 00:53.165
and subsequent research I've done on life imprisonment,

00:53.545 --> 00:57.885
it was found that it was a sentence of absolute,

00:58.505 --> 01:02.165
retribution, incapacitation

01:02.185 --> 01:06.125
or an extreme form of incapacitation, which,

01:06.635 --> 01:09.765
certainly doesn't allow for the other purposes

01:09.765 --> 01:13.205
of sentencing, including rehabilitation to be considered.

01:13.785 --> 01:18.085
And it's simply, it's really a, a form of,

01:18.605 --> 01:23.205
absolute revenge on that person, in the form of,

01:23.535 --> 01:25.925
never to be released to parole.

01:26.425 --> 01:31.165
So the other points that, we were,

01:31.505 --> 01:35.485
I mean I, in talking about whether it's justified

01:35.505 --> 01:39.405
or not, it's, it's, that's a moot question.

01:39.565 --> 01:43.165
I suppose. Some people can be forever dangerous,

01:43.305 --> 01:45.925
but that is, very difficult to predict.

01:46.975 --> 01:50.875
And, we don't have sophisticated enough procedures,

01:51.125 --> 01:54.915
tools, as a psychoanalysis

01:55.875 --> 01:59.675
forensic psychiatrist that can accurately do that,

02:00.295 --> 02:02.195
well into the future.

02:02.495 --> 02:05.995
So the thing about life sentences is some people when

02:05.995 --> 02:08.435
they're sentenced to life imprisonment can be

02:09.605 --> 02:11.635
relatively young, can be, you know,

02:11.635 --> 02:13.395
in their twenties or thirties.

02:13.575 --> 02:16.355
So they would have a very, very long time

02:17.215 --> 02:21.675
to serve in prison without any, chance of release

02:21.895 --> 02:26.395
and without any sort of prospect of being reassessed as

02:26.395 --> 02:29.155
to their dangerousness to the community.

02:29.155 --> 02:32.835
And whether or not, what they've done initially

02:33.415 --> 02:36.515
is something that would be repeated if they were,

02:36.515 --> 02:39.995
were released, which is, of course, the dangerous situation.

02:40.495 --> 02:43.715
So, turning to some of the Australian cases, I mean,

02:43.715 --> 02:48.075
there are very few cases where we have had recidivist,

02:48.655 --> 02:50.355
homicide offenders.

02:50.895 --> 02:55.515
Um, there have been prisoners who have been sentenced

02:56.255 --> 02:57.755
for murders and been released

02:58.015 --> 03:01.725
and have committed other crimes, violent crimes,

03:02.425 --> 03:05.125
but there are very few that have committed,

03:05.805 --> 03:09.645
homicide offenses, particularly murder offenses.

03:09.645 --> 03:12.205
When we talk about the category of homicide, we, of course,

03:12.205 --> 03:17.165
including all, unnatural deaths, which will be murder

03:17.705 --> 03:21.845
as the worst form of unnatural death, down

03:21.905 --> 03:22.965
to manslaughter

03:23.025 --> 03:27.925
and other forms of, death resulting from,

03:28.545 --> 03:32.125
driving offenses, assaults and things like that.

03:32.625 --> 03:35.525
So there is a range of homicide offenses as well.

03:36.425 --> 03:39.885
Um, so in relation to some of the cases that have sort of,

03:39.885 --> 03:42.245
and they get very high profile, of course,

03:42.785 --> 03:45.845
in the media if they are released to parole

03:45.845 --> 03:47.685
and then commit further violent offenses,

03:47.685 --> 03:49.085
particularly if they can,

03:49.085 --> 03:50.525
commit further homicide offenses.

03:51.225 --> 03:54.005
Um, very few in Australia.

03:54.205 --> 03:57.165
I mean, Adrian Bailey is probably one of the,

03:57.795 --> 04:02.605
notorious cases from the state of Victoria where, he was

04:03.265 --> 04:07.005
on parole and committed some a, a brutal rape

04:07.065 --> 04:10.045
and murder of a, a journalist.

04:10.545 --> 04:14.085
And there was a lot of sort of comeback looking at whether

04:14.105 --> 04:17.005
or not, the release to parole was appropriate,

04:17.455 --> 04:18.485
those sorts of things.

04:18.705 --> 04:22.245
He, he was quite a, he did have a,

04:22.645 --> 04:26.045
a very long history of violence against women,

04:26.665 --> 04:28.365
so there was that as well.

04:28.945 --> 04:32.325
Um, he was eventually sentenced to life imprisonment,

04:32.325 --> 04:35.205
but still did get another, did get an on parole period

04:35.665 --> 04:36.685
of 35 years,

04:36.745 --> 04:39.685
but it'll be whether he'll be released to parole in time.

04:40.425 --> 04:43.045
Uh, Terence Leary was another one in New South Wales

04:43.465 --> 04:46.005
who was released, from serving a murder sentence

04:46.005 --> 04:49.525
and was convicted of a serious sexual assault offense,

04:49.865 --> 04:54.845
not a another killing, the only one really in,

04:54.945 --> 04:57.725
new South Wales is the case of Walsh,

04:57.785 --> 05:01.725
who committed another, who was in prison for murder,

05:02.025 --> 05:04.805
and had committed, had murdered members of his family.

05:05.625 --> 05:10.445
And, he actually then, whilst he was in prison,

05:10.785 --> 05:12.525
killed one of his cellmates.

05:13.065 --> 05:16.085
So that was a, a murder

05:16.905 --> 05:19.165
in prison while still serving the prison sentence,

05:19.185 --> 05:21.525
so hadn't actually been released into the community.

05:22.025 --> 05:25.775
So those are the sort of cases that do attract a lot

05:25.775 --> 05:27.175
of the media attention, but,

05:27.795 --> 05:31.415
but sort of skew the, thinking about whether

05:31.475 --> 05:34.735
or not, murderers are recidivists.

05:35.865 --> 05:40.125
So when we talk about recidivism, as a, as a measure,

05:40.475 --> 05:43.365
it's, there are different ways of measuring it.

05:43.665 --> 05:46.565
You know, you, you can, you can,

05:46.565 --> 05:49.325
there are some recidivism studies that talk about arrest

05:49.425 --> 05:52.005
and charge some that talk about having to go

05:52.005 --> 05:54.925
through the court process and resulting in conviction

05:54.925 --> 05:56.765
and re imprisonment. So

05:57.025 --> 05:59.325
Is that, what is the recidivism measure?

05:59.385 --> 06:02.925
So the recidivism measure that I used for this study was

06:02.995 --> 06:05.765
that there had to be a reconviction

06:05.765 --> 06:08.245
and it had to be of a homicide offense,

06:08.705 --> 06:11.765
and it had to be resulting re imprisonment.

06:11.945 --> 06:15.725
So in Australia, there have been some studies conducted as

06:15.745 --> 06:19.885
to, recidivism, general studies about recidivism.

06:20.465 --> 06:24.365
Um, very few specific studies about,

06:24.895 --> 06:26.525
recidivism by murderers.

06:26.665 --> 06:30.405
So, there are more international studies in that regard.

06:30.865 --> 06:35.525
But in Australia, the, research really shows

06:35.875 --> 06:40.045
that, there has been, depending on the sort

06:40.045 --> 06:43.805
of the parameters of the study, what definitions are used,

06:43.995 --> 06:47.445
what measures are used, what follow up periods are used.

06:47.625 --> 06:52.165
So recidivism studies often, you know, from release, the,

06:52.585 --> 06:55.725
the period of follow up can vary from between, you know,

06:55.765 --> 06:57.725
a couple of years, right up to 30

06:57.825 --> 07:01.325
or 40 years, particularly if you are looking at release of

07:01.925 --> 07:05.125
homicide offenders, you are looking at a, a desist,

07:05.125 --> 07:07.005
whether there's desistence over the period

07:07.005 --> 07:11.005
of a particular course of time, which includes the,

07:11.465 --> 07:13.285
can include the entire life course.

07:13.585 --> 07:16.485
So there are different measures

07:16.485 --> 07:18.405
and different types of studies that have been done.

07:18.425 --> 07:20.645
But most of the Australian studies

07:20.715 --> 07:25.645
that I looked at in this particular, study that I did,

07:25.645 --> 07:28.885
and I was doing a qualitative analysis of all these studies,

07:29.865 --> 07:32.365
there were a few from New South Wales.

07:32.585 --> 07:37.285
So the study completed by Thompson in 1995

07:37.905 --> 07:42.645
showed that, there was low recidivism in relation to

07:43.535 --> 07:45.405
those released from prison

07:45.505 --> 07:47.645
who had committed murder offenses.

07:47.645 --> 07:51.125
And if they did, there was a,

07:52.625 --> 07:54.605
no, homicide recidivism.

07:55.135 --> 07:56.565
There was actually,

07:57.555 --> 08:01.605
only there was some violent recidivism, but it was very low.

08:02.105 --> 08:04.845
Um, a lot of the recidivism we see,

08:05.465 --> 08:07.805
and you know, the figures that are quoted, you know, 40

08:07.825 --> 08:12.565
and 50% recidivism, the recidivism is actually,

08:13.145 --> 08:15.805
breach of parole, minor breach of parole

08:15.905 --> 08:17.365
or minor offenses.

08:17.785 --> 08:19.805
Um, might be different types of offenses,

08:20.135 --> 08:23.165
might be property offenses or drug offenses

08:23.185 --> 08:24.805
or other types of offenses,

08:24.805 --> 08:27.805
but certainly not, a significant amount

08:27.805 --> 08:29.285
of violent re-offending

08:29.705 --> 08:33.445
and certainly no homicide re-offending.

08:33.665 --> 08:34.685
So it's,

08:35.405 --> 08:39.645
although you do see in studies, recidivism rates,

08:39.645 --> 08:42.405
which do sort of, you think, there are,

08:42.695 --> 08:46.085
there are quite a, a number of people who,

08:46.865 --> 08:48.445
offend again when they leave prison.

08:49.085 --> 08:52.205
I think when you take a deeper dive into that data

08:52.345 --> 08:54.565
and you look at the nuances and you

08:54.845 --> 08:57.885
Consider the data much more carefully, you'll see

08:57.885 --> 09:01.245
that it's not startling the rec recidivism

09:01.245 --> 09:05.445
because you are not getting violent or homicide reoffenders.

09:06.265 --> 09:07.885
So there, there were, there were a number

09:07.885 --> 09:12.165
of other studies done, 2016 study

09:12.865 --> 09:14.645
on serious violent offenders,

09:14.645 --> 09:18.045
which showed a very small percentage of,

09:18.265 --> 09:19.765
recidivism.

09:20.095 --> 09:23.685
Again, there was a Victorian study in 2007,

09:24.215 --> 09:28.445
which also showed that, it was a very,

09:29.115 --> 09:31.765
very low amount of,

09:32.455 --> 09:34.765
recidivism from homicide offenders.

09:35.385 --> 09:37.525
So very small percentages.

09:37.705 --> 09:42.565
So you are looking at, you know, between say, one to 3%

09:43.145 --> 09:46.525
of offenders that are really offending in committing

09:46.765 --> 09:47.925
homicides again, and the, and the,

09:47.945 --> 09:51.205
the homicide range can be across manslaughter

09:51.425 --> 09:52.605
as well as murder.

09:53.185 --> 09:57.245
And then you've got, you may have, you know, up to, 10%

09:57.305 --> 10:02.285
or so, in the Victorian study in 2007,

10:03.105 --> 10:05.845
there was a very small percentage

10:05.865 --> 10:08.885
of convicted murderers, 5%

10:08.945 --> 10:13.285
and homicide offenders, 3% that returned to prison.

10:14.225 --> 10:19.125
Um, there was, only 1% of those

10:19.355 --> 10:23.485
that really counted for reconviction for murder,

10:24.065 --> 10:26.005
and probably the, the best study,

10:26.005 --> 10:29.645
the latest one we've seen in, Australia,

10:29.865 --> 10:34.045
in western Australia using survival analysis techniques

10:34.705 --> 10:36.405
was in 2017.

10:36.945 --> 10:40.605
And that particular one showed a,

10:41.825 --> 10:46.805
out of, 1088 homicide offenders that were,

10:46.945 --> 10:51.685
released in the sample over a longitudinal period.

10:51.865 --> 10:54.365
So it was quite a long, study.

10:54.435 --> 10:58.285
This one, only three out of those were identified as

10:58.285 --> 11:02.765
what we call homologous recidivists, homicide,

11:03.055 --> 11:04.725
there, and only one of those

11:05.545 --> 11:08.765
was a true homologous offender in the sense

11:08.765 --> 11:10.245
of murder committing a murder.

11:10.865 --> 11:15.285
So, that data from West Australia,

11:15.505 --> 11:18.605
in the latest study shows that there's been,

11:18.875 --> 11:20.445
it's an extreme rarity.

11:21.005 --> 11:25.205
Homicide, offending is a re, extreme rarity

11:25.825 --> 11:30.205
in, all those homicide re-offending, I should say,

11:30.585 --> 11:33.445
is a, an extreme rarity in all those studies.

11:34.105 --> 11:37.445
So, in that

11:38.505 --> 11:42.195
overall then I suppose what it does show us about the risk

11:42.215 --> 11:43.355
of violent

11:43.415 --> 11:46.475
and homicidal recidivism in this distinct

11:46.475 --> 11:47.515
group of offenders.

11:47.535 --> 11:50.445
So I'm talking about those who've been

11:50.645 --> 11:52.685
previously convicted of murder. Um,

11:53.185 --> 11:57.845
The risk of re-offending for a violent offense,

11:59.065 --> 12:01.845
and a is, is low,

12:02.565 --> 12:04.685
although it does occur,

12:05.025 --> 12:08.245
and the risk of committing the same offense

12:08.245 --> 12:12.045
that homologous offending is extremely low

12:12.385 --> 12:16.525
and is very rare, it does not happen as a general rule.

12:17.105 --> 12:18.165
Um, so

12:18.235 --> 12:22.285
therefore, that assistance from violent crime in this

12:23.165 --> 12:26.405
distinct group of offenders is significant,

12:26.405 --> 12:28.365
during the life course they do,

12:28.795 --> 12:31.285
they do show over long periods of time,

12:31.305 --> 12:35.085
and the longitudinal studies show we would refer to

12:35.105 --> 12:37.805
as bulk desistence offending generally,

12:38.305 --> 12:42.925
and from re-offending with, homologous homicides

12:43.305 --> 12:45.405
or even serious violent offenses.

12:45.555 --> 12:49.605
International studies do, show very similar

12:50.505 --> 12:51.565
to the Australian study.

12:51.665 --> 12:55.085
So I looked at, there was one New Zealand study which showed

12:55.455 --> 12:59.165
there was only 4% of convicted murderers

13:00.045 --> 13:02.205
reconvicted of another offense during the study

13:02.235 --> 13:04.245
that was done in 2002,

13:04.905 --> 13:09.075
and there was no, there were no,

13:10.205 --> 13:12.995
homologous homicide offenders in that category.

13:12.995 --> 13:16.875
There were some violent offenses recommitted,

13:17.055 --> 13:19.275
but there was no,

13:19.955 --> 13:22.315
re-offending in homicide, Canada.

13:22.965 --> 13:24.635
There were a number of studies done in Canada.

13:25.085 --> 13:27.715
There were some early studies and some later studies.

13:27.715 --> 13:32.475
They've all showed very low levels of, so in,

13:32.535 --> 13:35.795
2002 studies, there was a,

13:36.395 --> 13:40.795
a 0.3% re-offending, of offenders

13:41.225 --> 13:42.675
with homologous homicide.

13:43.255 --> 13:47.875
Um, an earlier 1992 study had showed

13:47.875 --> 13:52.275
0.76%, five out of 658

13:53.035 --> 13:54.835
offenders released to parole,

13:55.055 --> 13:56.835
had committed another homicide,

13:56.855 --> 13:59.315
or were convicted of a convicted of another murder.

13:59.375 --> 14:02.075
So I did use that measure of recidivism

14:02.265 --> 14:05.355
that there was a conviction for murder

14:05.415 --> 14:06.715
and a re imprisonment.

14:07.575 --> 14:11.675
And also there was a 2010 study in Canada

14:12.345 --> 14:15.155
over a 30 year period, which showed, again,

14:15.475 --> 14:19.155
homicide recidivism was extremely small, very low.

14:20.095 --> 14:24.355
Um, the United States is another, jurisdiction,

14:24.355 --> 14:27.875
which also does support those findings.

14:27.965 --> 14:31.995
There have been quite a few studies in the United States.

14:31.995 --> 14:36.275
There's a 2011 study by newly, which showed the extreme

14:36.975 --> 14:39.795
rarity of homo homologous homicide offending.

14:40.325 --> 14:44.915
There was a 2014 study in, Philadelphia

14:45.415 --> 14:49.275
by Lim, which showed, again,

14:49.485 --> 14:51.965
about 3% of offenders recidivating

14:52.465 --> 14:56.525
by committing another homicide while most of the,

14:56.535 --> 14:59.765
54% of offenders who did recidivate.

14:59.765 --> 15:02.565
Again, you're getting those high numbers, committed minor

15:03.135 --> 15:05.965
nonviolent offenses, probation violations,

15:06.335 --> 15:07.365
those sorts of things.

15:07.545 --> 15:11.045
So there was very general theme from the North American

15:11.435 --> 15:16.125
studies is that it's exceptional for recidivist conduct

15:16.225 --> 15:18.405
of homicide offenders to involve another killing,

15:18.485 --> 15:19.685
particularly murder.

15:20.065 --> 15:21.205
And the other one that I looked at

15:21.205 --> 15:24.685
that I think really was supportive of this was the,

15:24.985 --> 15:29.965
was the market and Sorenson study that was done in,

15:30.445 --> 15:34.085
relation to the Furman decision in the Supreme Court

15:34.085 --> 15:37.605
of the United States, when the capital punishment had been

15:37.605 --> 15:38.925
found to be unconstitutional.

15:39.225 --> 15:40.925
And there were a number of inmates

15:40.925 --> 15:44.245
that were released under the Furman decision,

15:45.025 --> 15:46.725
and that was a study that showed,

15:47.185 --> 15:49.405
and they were capital offenders, so they're actually,

15:49.635 --> 15:52.565
they had death sentences, not life sentences,

15:52.745 --> 15:56.005
but they were released to, to parole.

15:56.465 --> 15:59.205
And there was a, a very small proportion of those

15:59.835 --> 16:03.165
that were released over the period that the Furman decision,

16:04.025 --> 16:05.885
held fast in the United States

16:05.885 --> 16:08.285
before the Supreme Court came back

16:08.285 --> 16:11.565
and said the capital punishment was constitutional again.

16:12.065 --> 16:15.925
Um, there was 79% of those

16:15.925 --> 16:18.485
that were released didn't commit further crimes.

16:18.855 --> 16:23.165
There were 239 Furman commuted prisoners

16:23.165 --> 16:24.165
that were released.

16:24.905 --> 16:27.285
And, in the community, 79%

16:27.285 --> 16:29.325
of those didn't commit further crimes.

16:29.825 --> 16:33.725
And a very small proportion of them, around 12%

16:33.725 --> 16:35.685
of them committed a range of felonies,

16:35.995 --> 16:37.245
some involving violence,

16:38.105 --> 16:42.725
but, there were no other homicides,

16:43.225 --> 16:45.885
committed by those offenders.

16:45.985 --> 16:50.565
So, you can extrapolate data from that

16:51.145 --> 16:53.125
to show that,

16:54.385 --> 16:57.445
to actually deprive those prisoners of the opportunity

16:57.505 --> 17:00.965
for release, would've been,

17:01.835 --> 17:03.725
detrimental really to the community.

17:03.905 --> 17:08.165
It then would've really been a simply a slow execution,

17:08.785 --> 17:11.285
to re to keep them in prison for life.

17:11.425 --> 17:14.925
So most, the large majority of those,

17:14.995 --> 17:16.765
prisoners didn't recidivate.

17:17.385 --> 17:19.925
Uh, the other jurisdictions I looked at internationally,

17:19.925 --> 17:24.645
England and Wales, again, they showed a very low proportion

17:24.645 --> 17:26.445
of life sentence prisoners.

17:26.685 --> 17:27.765
I think the Mitchell

17:27.765 --> 17:31.085
and Roberts study from 2012 showed

17:31.085 --> 17:35.205
that there were less than 0.5% of persons,

17:36.025 --> 17:39.325
who were released for convictions for murder

17:39.345 --> 17:44.045
or manslaughter, who were then, reconvicted

17:44.045 --> 17:45.925
of murder or manslaughter.

17:46.065 --> 17:50.485
So it was, over 6,000 prisoners released

17:50.625 --> 17:52.405
during a 10 year period.

17:53.185 --> 17:57.445
And around 30 of those, which was less than 0.5%,

17:58.235 --> 18:02.165
were reconvicted for those types of offenses.

18:02.705 --> 18:07.245
And the other, area of the world, which has had a number

18:07.245 --> 18:12.085
of studies done in this regard is Scandinavia, so Finland

18:12.085 --> 18:14.165
and Sweden, and they all show,

18:14.695 --> 18:17.405
there are some very good studies there by Maki Li

18:17.985 --> 18:22.365
and others, and also, stirrup and lindquist.

18:22.385 --> 18:26.365
So there are a number of studies in 2013,

18:26.545 --> 18:29.565
2014 that show,

18:31.045 --> 18:34.965
prevalence rates ranging from about one to 3.5%

18:34.965 --> 18:36.565
of all homicides.

18:37.025 --> 18:41.365
And also generally a substantial period of time will elapse

18:41.365 --> 18:44.205
between the first and second,

18:44.645 --> 18:47.605
homicide in those particular countries.

18:47.605 --> 18:49.765
So international studies,

18:49.945 --> 18:53.405
and Australian studies are fairly consistent in that regard.

18:54.025 --> 18:56.805
But there is still is a very, very low rate of

18:57.275 --> 18:59.925
what we would call homologous homicide offending.

19:00.505 --> 19:03.965
And again, around finding sort of, you know, between 10

19:03.965 --> 19:07.005
to 15% of those offenders may commit

19:07.395 --> 19:09.845
what we would call violent offenses again,

19:10.465 --> 19:14.845
but it's still quite low comparatively to the numbers

19:15.665 --> 19:17.285
who are released and who don't offend

19:17.345 --> 19:20.205
or who commit very minor offenses.

19:20.475 --> 19:24.445
This was done really to look about, look at what the utility

19:24.545 --> 19:28.365
of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole would be,

19:29.025 --> 19:30.085
and whether

19:30.185 --> 19:34.405
or not recidivism of, offenders

19:34.405 --> 19:37.325
who had been released to parole for committing a crime

19:37.325 --> 19:39.365
of murder and been sentenced to life imprisonment

19:39.365 --> 19:42.125
and had the opportunity to be released to parole.

19:42.985 --> 19:46.725
Um, whether or not there was, a real danger

19:46.825 --> 19:50.725
and risk to society do, should we be prioritizing protection

19:50.725 --> 19:53.525
of the community over liberty

19:53.585 --> 19:58.325
of the citizen in allowing them to be released to parole,

19:59.065 --> 20:02.365
to, you know, have the opportunity to, to start life again,

20:02.825 --> 20:04.965
to show that they were reformed

20:04.965 --> 20:08.165
and that they wanted that opportunity to rejoin society.

20:08.825 --> 20:11.645
So it was really looking at, you know, what is their utility

20:12.385 --> 20:14.685
in the sentence of life imprisonment without parole,

20:14.685 --> 20:17.045
without ever considering someone

20:17.425 --> 20:19.205
for parole again, no matter what.

20:19.785 --> 20:23.725
Um, not taking, you know, taking this as one measure,

20:23.785 --> 20:26.285
but also I did refer to in the study

20:26.285 --> 20:29.965
that there has been an increasing sophistication and,

20:30.025 --> 20:33.845
and accuracy in predictive measures as to whether someone

20:34.395 --> 20:35.525
will become dangerous.

20:35.525 --> 20:38.165
So there are a number of tools that have been developed

20:38.305 --> 20:40.965
by psychiatrists and psychologists

20:41.025 --> 20:44.245
and others in relation to being able

20:44.245 --> 20:46.765
to predict dangerousness and being

20:46.765 --> 20:50.965
Able to assess people, at different stages

20:51.585 --> 20:54.965
of their, incarceration to

20:55.595 --> 20:56.725
look again at whether

20:56.825 --> 20:58.045
or not, you know,

20:58.075 --> 21:00.845
they may have been particularly dangerous at the time they

21:00.845 --> 21:02.845
were sentenced to life imprisonment.

21:02.845 --> 21:05.765
But has that changed throughout the period

21:05.765 --> 21:06.805
that they've been in prison?

21:07.025 --> 21:09.485
Has there been a, has there been, you know,

21:10.165 --> 21:12.925
a success in the sentencing and correction period?

21:13.505 --> 21:18.405
So this was, something that I was looking at really,

21:19.105 --> 21:23.405
directed to with, is there utility in life,

21:23.525 --> 21:25.325
imprisonment without parole?

21:25.465 --> 21:30.325
And just forming another plank in an argument to say

21:30.435 --> 21:35.265
that there is life imprisonment is simply without parole,

21:35.445 --> 21:38.225
is, is simply a form of absolute retribution,

21:38.695 --> 21:43.305
extreme incapacitation, which is not necessarily justified.

21:43.725 --> 21:48.425
And we are not allowing our fellow citizens, I know they,

21:49.095 --> 21:50.465
they have offended

21:50.605 --> 21:53.145
and offended gravely against society

21:53.645 --> 21:57.065
by committing heinous crimes and murder offenses.

21:57.165 --> 21:58.785
But in the end,

21:58.965 --> 22:02.665
should we not be still allowing them the opportunity to show

22:03.175 --> 22:04.505
that they can reform

22:05.085 --> 22:08.065
and that they can be successfully released from prison

22:08.535 --> 22:10.585
without being a risk to others?

22:11.445 --> 22:15.385
Um, it, it, of course, you know, there is a caution in that,

22:15.815 --> 22:17.345
that, we have to be

22:18.055 --> 22:21.105
very careful about releasing offenders who have that sort

22:21.105 --> 22:22.825
of pattern of history

22:22.845 --> 22:24.545
and the types of crimes they've committed.

22:24.545 --> 22:27.985
But otherwise, it was really looking at that.

22:28.085 --> 22:31.905
So I mean, I, I came down to looking in the final analysis

22:31.965 --> 22:34.665
to saying there was a, a demonstrated

22:34.725 --> 22:38.905
and vast me measure of desistance from serious crime

22:39.365 --> 22:42.585
and subsequent homicides by murderers released to parole.

22:43.085 --> 22:44.345
And therefore I think that's

22:44.365 --> 22:48.225
of significant weight in determining the measure of success

22:48.765 --> 22:50.265
of sentencing and corrections.

22:50.765 --> 22:54.025
And then at the same time, with sophisticated

22:54.085 --> 22:58.065
and reliable modern methods for assessing the future risk

22:58.065 --> 23:01.665
of previously violent offenders, then we can get more

23:02.355 --> 23:04.105
confidence in the accuracy

23:04.105 --> 23:06.905
of predictions about violent re-offending.

23:07.445 --> 23:12.185
And it leads to that argument, or it helps to prop up

23:12.185 --> 23:15.185
or develop the argument that the sentence

23:15.185 --> 23:19.225
of life imprisonment is of limited, if any utility

23:19.285 --> 23:20.785
for most convicted murderers

23:21.245 --> 23:24.185
and even for the community from which they've been excu

23:24.505 --> 23:28.865
excluded, because you are potentially excluding, people

23:28.885 --> 23:31.385
who can contribute back to society

23:31.395 --> 23:35.185
after they have gone through a period of reformation.

23:35.445 --> 23:39.595
So release procedures are not infallible,

23:40.095 --> 23:43.635
but, when we think of what we are trying

23:43.635 --> 23:47.805
to do in corrections, in really rehabilitate

23:48.065 --> 23:51.925
and, try to give,

23:51.995 --> 23:56.005
prisoners the opportunity to take their place in society

23:56.425 --> 24:01.245
and resume their liberty in an ordinary way, are we doing a,

24:02.045 --> 24:03.325
a disservice to them

24:03.585 --> 24:05.725
and to the community when we have sentences of

24:06.315 --> 24:09.525
life imprisonment without any prospect of release on parole?

24:10.145 --> 24:15.005
So it was developing planks in arguments about the,

24:15.025 --> 24:18.765
the distil in my view of the natural life sentence.

Analysis of Life Imprisonment Recidivism Trends

00:00:00 - The context for the study is a broader research context in which I've been studying the sentence of life imprisonment since I completed my PhD over 20 years ago. so it's been an ongoing, study and there have been different aspects to it. So this current study relates to, looking at doing a qualitative analysis and, a of different studies
00:00:33 - of murderers who have been released to parole, when sentenced to life imprisonment, but being allowed to be released, the sentence of life imprisonment itself. when I completed my PhD research and subsequent research I've done on life imprisonment, it was found that it was a sentence of absolute, retribution, incapacitation
00:01:06 - certainly doesn't allow for the other purposes of sentencing, including rehabilitation to be considered. And it's simply, it's really a, a form of, absolute revenge on that person, in the form of, never to be released to parole. So the other points that, we were, I mean I, in talking about whether it's justified
00:01:39 - I suppose. Some people can be forever dangerous, but that is, very difficult to predict. And, we don't have sophisticated enough procedures, tools, as a psychoanalysis forensic psychiatrist that can accurately do that, well into the future. So the thing about life sentences is some people when
00:02:09 - relatively young, can be, you know, in their twenties or thirties. So they would have a very, very long time to serve in prison without any, chance of release and without any sort of prospect of being reassessed as to their dangerousness to the community. And whether or not, what they've done initially is something that would be repeated if they were,
00:02:40 - So, turning to some of the Australian cases, I mean, there are very few cases where we have had recidivist, homicide offenders. there have been prisoners who have been sentenced for murders and been released and have committed other crimes, violent crimes, but there are very few that have committed, homicide offenses, particularly murder offenses.

Recidivism Rates Among Homicide Offenders

00:03:12 - including all, unnatural deaths, which will be murder as the worst form of unnatural death, down to manslaughter and other forms of, death resulting from, driving offenses, assaults and things like that. So there is a range of homicide offenses as well. so in relation to some of the cases that have sort of,
00:03:42 - in the media if they are released to parole and then commit further violent offenses, particularly if they can, commit further homicide offenses. very few in Australia. I mean, Adrian Bailey is probably one of the, notorious cases from the state of Victoria where, he was on parole and committed some a, a brutal rape and murder of a, a journalist.
00:04:14 - or not, the release to parole was appropriate, those sorts of things. He, he was quite a, he did have a, a very long history of violence against women, so there was that as well. he was eventually sentenced to life imprisonment, but still did get another, did get an on parole period of 35 years, but it'll be whether he'll be released to parole in time. Terence Leary was another one in New South Wales
00:04:46 - and was convicted of a serious sexual assault offense, not a another killing, the only one really in, new South Wales is the case of Walsh, who committed another, who was in prison for murder, and had committed, had murdered members of his family. And, he actually then, whilst he was in prison, killed one of his cellmates. So that was a, a murder
00:05:19 - so hadn't actually been released into the community. So those are the sort of cases that do attract a lot of the media attention, but, but sort of skew the, thinking about whether or not, murderers are recidivists. So when we talk about recidivism, as a, as a measure, it's, there are different ways of measuring it. You know, you, you can, you can, there are some recidivism studies that talk about arrest
00:05:52 - through the court process and resulting in conviction and re imprisonment. So Is that, what is the recidivism measure? So the recidivism measure that I used for this study was that there had to be a reconviction and it had to be of a homicide offense, and it had to be resulting re imprisonment. So in Australia, there have been some studies conducted as to, recidivism, general studies about recidivism.

Examining Homicide Recidivism in Australia

00:06:24 - recidivism by murderers. So, there are more international studies in that regard. But in Australia, the, research really shows that, there has been, depending on the sort of the parameters of the study, what definitions are used, what measures are used, what follow up periods are used. So recidivism studies often, you know, from release, the,
00:06:55 - a couple of years, right up to 30 or 40 years, particularly if you are looking at release of homicide offenders, you are looking at a, a desist, whether there's desistence over the period of a particular course of time, which includes the, can include the entire life course. So there are different measures and different types of studies that have been done. But most of the Australian studies that I looked at in this particular, study that I did,
00:07:29 - there were a few from New South Wales. So the study completed by Thompson in 1995 showed that, there was low recidivism in relation to those released from prison who had committed murder offenses. And if they did, there was a, no, homicide recidivism. There was actually,
00:08:02 - a lot of the recidivism we see, and you know, the figures that are quoted, you know, 40 and 50% recidivism, the recidivism is actually, breach of parole, minor breach of parole or minor offenses. might be different types of offenses, might be property offenses or drug offenses or other types of offenses, but certainly not, a significant amount
00:08:29 - and certainly no homicide re-offending. So it's, although you do see in studies, recidivism rates, which do sort of, you think, there are, there are quite a, a number of people who, offend again when they leave prison. I think when you take a deeper dive into that data and you look at the nuances and you Consider the data much more carefully, you'll see
00:09:01 - because you are not getting violent or homicide reoffenders. So there, there were, there were a number of other studies done, 2016 study on serious violent offenders, which showed a very small percentage of, recidivism. Again, there was a Victorian study in 2007, which also showed that, it was a very,

Low Recidivism Rates Among Homicide Offenders

00:09:32 - recidivism from homicide offenders. So very small percentages. So you are looking at, you know, between say, one to 3% of offenders that are really offending in committing homicides again, and the, and the, the homicide range can be across manslaughter as well as murder. And then you've got, you may have, you know, up to, 10% or so, in the Victorian study in 2007,
00:10:05 - of convicted murderers, 5% and homicide offenders, 3% that returned to prison. there was, only 1% of those that really counted for reconviction for murder, and probably the, the best study, the latest one we've seen in, Australia, in western Australia using survival analysis techniques
00:10:36 - And that particular one showed a, out of, 1088 homicide offenders that were, released in the sample over a longitudinal period. So it was quite a long, study. This one, only three out of those were identified as what we call homologous recidivists, homicide, there, and only one of those
00:11:08 - of murder committing a murder. So, that data from West Australia, in the latest study shows that there's been, it's an extreme rarity. Homicide, offending is a re, extreme rarity in, all those homicide re-offending, I should say, is a, an extreme rarity in all those studies. So, in that
00:11:42 - of violent and homicidal recidivism in this distinct group of offenders. So I'm talking about those who've been previously convicted of murder. The risk of re-offending for a violent offense, and a is, is low, although it does occur, and the risk of committing the same offense that homologous offending is extremely low
00:12:17 - so therefore, that assistance from violent crime in this distinct group of offenders is significant, during the life course they do, they do show over long periods of time, and the longitudinal studies show we would refer to as bulk desistence offending generally, and from re-offending with, homologous homicides

Recidivism Rates Among Homicide Offenders Studied

00:12:45 - International studies do, show very similar to the Australian study. So I looked at, there was one New Zealand study which showed there was only 4% of convicted murderers reconvicted of another offense during the study that was done in 2002, and there was no, there were no, homologous homicide offenders in that category. There were some violent offenses recommitted,
00:13:19 - re-offending in homicide, Canada. There were a number of studies done in Canada. There were some early studies and some later studies. They've all showed very low levels of, so in, 2002 studies, there was a, a 0.3% re-offending, of offenders with homologous homicide. an earlier 1992 study had showed
00:13:53 - offenders released to parole, had committed another homicide, or were convicted of a convicted of another murder. So I did use that measure of recidivism that there was a conviction for murder and a re imprisonment. And also there was a 2010 study in Canada over a 30 year period, which showed, again, homicide recidivism was extremely small, very low.
00:14:24 - which also does support those findings. There have been quite a few studies in the United States. There's a 2011 study by newly, which showed the extreme rarity of homo homologous homicide offending. There was a 2014 study in, Philadelphia by Lim, which showed, again, about 3% of offenders recidivating
00:14:56 - 54% of offenders who did recidivate. Again, you're getting those high numbers, committed minor nonviolent offenses, probation violations, those sorts of things. So there was very general theme from the North American studies is that it's exceptional for recidivist conduct of homicide offenders to involve another killing, particularly murder. And the other one that I looked at that I think really was supportive of this was the,
00:15:30 - relation to the Furman decision in the Supreme Court of the United States, when the capital punishment had been found to be unconstitutional. And there were a number of inmates that were released under the Furman decision, and that was a study that showed, and they were capital offenders, so they're actually, they had death sentences, not life sentences, but they were released to, to parole.

Recidivism Rates Among Life Sentence Prisoners

00:15:59 - that were released over the period that the Furman decision, held fast in the United States before the Supreme Court came back and said the capital punishment was constitutional again. there was 79% of those that were released didn't commit further crimes. There were 239 Furman commuted prisoners that were released. And, in the community, 79%
00:16:29 - And a very small proportion of them, around 12% of them committed a range of felonies, some involving violence, but, there were no other homicides, committed by those offenders. So, you can extrapolate data from that to show that, to actually deprive those prisoners of the opportunity
00:17:01 - detrimental really to the community. It then would've really been a simply a slow execution, to re to keep them in prison for life. So most, the large majority of those, prisoners didn't recidivate. the other jurisdictions I looked at internationally, England and Wales, again, they showed a very low proportion of life sentence prisoners. I think the Mitchell
00:17:31 - that there were less than 0.5% of persons, who were released for convictions for murder or manslaughter, who were then, reconvicted of murder or manslaughter. So it was, over 6,000 prisoners released during a 10 year period. And around 30 of those, which was less than 0.5%,
00:18:02 - And the other, area of the world, which has had a number of studies done in this regard is Scandinavia, so Finland and Sweden, and they all show, there are some very good studies there by Maki Li and others, and also, stirrup and lindquist. So there are a number of studies in 2013, 2014 that show,
00:18:34 - of all homicides. And also generally a substantial period of time will elapse between the first and second, homicide in those particular countries. So international studies, and Australian studies are fairly consistent in that regard. But there is still is a very, very low rate of what we would call homologous homicide offending. And again, around finding sort of, you know, between 10

Evaluating Life Imprisonment Without Parole

00:19:07 - what we would call violent offenses again, but it's still quite low comparatively to the numbers who are released and who don't offend or who commit very minor offenses. This was done really to look about, look at what the utility of a sentence of life imprisonment without parole would be, and whether or not recidivism of, offenders
00:19:37 - of murder and been sentenced to life imprisonment and had the opportunity to be released to parole. whether or not there was, a real danger and risk to society do, should we be prioritizing protection of the community over liberty of the citizen in allowing them to be released to parole, to, you know, have the opportunity to, to start life again, to show that they were reformed
00:20:08 - So it was really looking at, you know, what is their utility in the sentence of life imprisonment without parole, without ever considering someone for parole again, no matter what. not taking, you know, taking this as one measure, but also I did refer to in the study that there has been an increasing sophistication and, and accuracy in predictive measures as to whether someone will become dangerous.
00:20:38 - by psychiatrists and psychologists and others in relation to being able to predict dangerousness and being Able to assess people, at different stages of their, incarceration to look again at whether or not, you know, they may have been particularly dangerous at the time they were sentenced to life imprisonment. But has that changed throughout the period
00:21:07 - Has there been a, has there been, you know, a success in the sentencing and correction period? So this was, something that I was looking at really, directed to with, is there utility in life, imprisonment without parole? And just forming another plank in an argument to say that there is life imprisonment is simply without parole, is, is simply a form of absolute retribution,
00:21:43 - And we are not allowing our fellow citizens, I know they, they have offended and offended gravely against society by committing heinous crimes and murder offenses. But in the end, should we not be still allowing them the opportunity to show that they can reform and that they can be successfully released from prison without being a risk to others?

Evaluating Parole and Recidivism in Murderers

00:22:15 - that, we have to be very careful about releasing offenders who have that sort of pattern of history and the types of crimes they've committed. But otherwise, it was really looking at that. So I mean, I, I came down to looking in the final analysis to saying there was a, a demonstrated and vast me measure of desistance from serious crime and subsequent homicides by murderers released to parole.
00:22:44 - of significant weight in determining the measure of success of sentencing and corrections. And then at the same time, with sophisticated and reliable modern methods for assessing the future risk of previously violent offenders, then we can get more confidence in the accuracy of predictions about violent re-offending. And it leads to that argument, or it helps to prop up or develop the argument that the sentence
00:23:19 - for most convicted murderers and even for the community from which they've been excu excluded, because you are potentially excluding, people who can contribute back to society after they have gone through a period of reformation. So release procedures are not infallible, but, when we think of what we are trying to do in corrections, in really rehabilitate
00:24:15 - prisoners the opportunity to take their place in society and resume their liberty in an ordinary way, are we doing a, a disservice to them and to the community when we have sentences of life imprisonment without any prospect of release on parole? So it was developing planks in arguments about the, the distil in my view of the natural life sentence.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Research

Policy

Analysis

Data

Originals

Explainers

Podcasts

Faculti

New on Faculti

Idea Explorer

Definition

News Context

Critical Questions and Answers

Research Summaries

Recidivism of Paroled Murderers

Media Literacy Toolkit

Critical Questions to Consider ▼

Bias and Perspective Awareness ▼

Further Reading ▼