If you have issues viewing or accessing~- ~~ .... this"... ,.,-=-" file=",--~- contact us-------.--.,....,...,.-------- at NCJRS.gov. £1 VIOLENT CRIME National Criminal Justice Reference Service II IN ALBERTA~. ... i~1 PAPER' #3 I, " Parole and the Violent Offender tJ This microfiche was produced from documents received for inclusion in the NCJRS data base. Since NCJRS cannot exercise "'1,1 control over the physical condition of the documents submitted, , 1-1 the individual frame quality will vary. The resolution chart on this frame may be used to evaluate the document quality. I, I·IJ \~, (" 1 " '-t.-""_" I~ '1 : 111112,8 111\12.5 1 1 1 Ii& ~3,2 22 \\\\\1.0 ~ . f,f' L:: I~ ::tJ:.:. W .. ~ ,. Ill"" I \\\\\1.1 \ , nj IIIII~ IIIII~ 111111.6 IJ MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART 11 1 J, NATIONAL BUREAU Of STANDARDS-1963-A I' iI i \ (' '/ Microfilming procedures used to create this fiche comply with the standards set forth in 41CFR 101-11.504. , l • 1 Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do notrepresent the official : ' ) ", ',' ," position or policies of the U. S. Department of Justice. ,? DATE FtlMtO ' ." J ~ : .. .i1:l'!~ti~iian~t~!'~flJU~e0 __\:.....· ____------If (} l United States Department of Justice 1 Washington, D. C. 20531 if ( I t.,. 1-4 ~•••••••••• _ 205 LEGISLATURE 1 I r the Official Opposttion' " .' 1 Ii: () I­ I' TABLE OF CONTENTS Page About the Authors ~ . i PAROLE A~D THE VIOLENT 'OFFENDER Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii c' By Public Perceptions of the Parole Board 1 The Implementation of Sentencing and Release Programs 1 Jim Hackler Remission and mandatory supervision 1 Q and Regular parole 2 i Laurel Gauld Day parole and.temporary absence m 3 .-"0'-'m .!!lc: 00"';: The Prediction of Violence and the Parole Board c:_ 3 O.c: .'" 0) (J'e "'>­ "00. Parole board dilemmas in granting parole 00 4 arm~ 0 ~.c: m­~­ June, 1980 Parole Board Decisions ~ 1975-1979 .c: 0 4 tc: ",0 LL'r;; The Results of Parole 5 I Readmission to penitentiary 5 'Centre for Criminological Research Success rate of those completing parole 6 Population Research laboratory . Department of Sociology Regional differences 7 The University of Albert~ ... Murderers on parole 7 t NCJRS·~ Conclusion 9 Footnotes APR 1 7 1981 . .f 11 Bibliography 11 . ~CQUISITfON. 0 I Appendix Ai Federal Inmates serving a Major Offence of Violence 12 B: Releases on Parole for Fiscal Year 1978~79 by Major Offence Type for Federal Inmates' 14 ~;~~~~:~~:~~~ ~~ffi~::T~~~~!~~i;~!C~!~~~f!~~~ebKs;~~b~;f~~eA~te~~~e~~d;~~~' C: Statistics on Murderers Released on Parole 16 Laboratory, The ~ni~~r~~tyO~fC~~~~~~~~glCal Research, Population Research D: Fedel~al Parolees Re-Admitted to Penitentiary 17 E: Federal Parole and Mandatory Supervision 18 Additional papers are: F: Federal Full Parole and Day Parole 19 G: How many capit~l murderers returned to federal penitentiary 20 J 1 H: How many non-capital murderers returned ·to federal penitentiary 21 ##2 Vioient.Crime in A~berta: Some Background Statistics I: How long do capital murderers serve in a penitentiary 22 Sentenc~ng Strategles and Violent Crime J: How long do non-capital murderers serve in a penitentiary J #4 Strategles for the Prevention of Violent Crime 23 ~, ~I • . i i i ABOUT THE AUTHORS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .li}1l Hackler has taught criminology courses at the University of f~lberta The Office of the Official Opposition felt that the topic of Violent s'ince 1965. He has served as president of the Canad-jan /\ssocia1:ioll" for Crime in Alberta was of concern to the general public and therefore supported Criminological Research and on' the ·boards of the 'Canadian f,ssociation for the this study to provide basic information to those with an interest in social J Prevention of Crime, the American Society ·of· CrimirlOlogys and the S,ociety for policy and the quality of life in Alberta. the Study of Social Problems. For several years he has been the Book Review The data used in this paper and the rest of the study have been obtained I Editor o·f the Canadian Journal of Criminology: His ·articles ha~e appeared in with the cooperation of individuals and departments at both the provincial and various Canadi.an, American, and international jou·rna1s;' and his bookJ THE federal level. The Research and Evaluation Section of the National Parole I GREAT STUMBLE FORWARD: THE PREVENTION OF YOUTHFUL CRIME, was published by Board was also very helpful. I Methuen in 1978. In addition, the authors would like to acknowledge the help of A. Sangadasa and Walter Hoffmann from the Research Division of the Alberta Department of I Laurel Gauld graduated from the University of·A1berta in 1975 with a B.A. the Solicitor General. They have alerted us to many potential errors in crime ,I in Recreation Administration. For three years she worked asa Tenant Program data. Consultant·for the Edmonton Housing Authority and was responsible for developing We would also like to thank Pat Briggs, Ilze Hobin, and Tana MacNab for I' and implementing community improvement programs for children and adults living [1 their continued help throughout this project. in publ ic housing projects ·throughout Edmonton. She. has al so worked on several I social resea.rch projects conducted through. the Population Research Laboratory, fl I The University of Alberta. I I I I ,I -- • ,,~--.~,<_,=~_~~=,===-=-.':::::::::::::=-_:=_~- I iH ,.' - ........ .".: • I The following paper examines a comnon. ptJ.biiG view that the .National 4. Parole Board is "soft" on violent offendersc 'Data collected by the National, Parole Board from 1975 -' 1979 are'examin~d to d~termine how many vioJent , . criminals are granted parole and how many are readmitted to prison for parole vialations. Based on these data and the findings of the Dangerous Offenders Project in 'Ohio, the authors conclude that,the.parole board has been very " cautious in granting parole. They sugge~t that ,the protection of s~ciety , .' ,. f '~.: , which can be achieved by keeping·violent offenders in jail for long' periods of J time has been overstated. .: ~~ •. f 't; .... .. ,: .. f \, I t f i : . 'I:CWill you stand still? L'ln 911 day parole and if t'm late getting back; no l~oi chocolate,for me-lonig~i!" Source: Edmonton Journal Narch 27, 1980. i, I . ... 1 I Kj n Para'ie and the Violent Offender r n Public Perceptions of the Parole Board . n On Marth 27, 1980 a cartoon appeared in the Edmonton Journal showing the stereotyped hoodlum carrying his black jack and pursuing an innocent victim u down the street. The caption had the hoodlum calling to the potential victim I to stop because if he did not get back to his community correctional centre, I U where he was free on day parole, he would miss out on his evening cup of fI cocoa. The cat'toon reflected an attitude shared by many: that the parole board rather casually releases violent offenders from jail so they-can continue U to 'attack citizens. In this paper we would like to explore the popular public view that the federal parole board is soft on violent offenders~ but first j'{ l l 1 we will review some aspects of the parole system. I i j ,f i The Implementation of Sentencing and Re-lease Programs II, Remission and mandatory supervision. Prison sentences in Canada can be thought of as having three sections of approximately equal portions. Remission, 11 commonly known as "time off for good behavior", usually represents the last U third of an inmate's sentence. Those who receive ti~e off for good behavior must serve that time under the mandatory supervision of the parole board. The IiiJ board has the authority to revoke that 5upervision and send individuals back [f to prison to serve the remaining portion of their sentence if the conditions of the release are violated or if the inmate commits a .new crime. One often 1 \~ hears complaints that if a judge says three years, it should mean a full three I "'- rl years, but many correctional workers, who could hardly be described a!.> "bleeding 1 i ' .ill 1 hearts," would argue that time off for good behavior has a number 'of features 1 in its favor. However, it 1S important to note that earned remis?ion-is not 1 rn: ., !i I "io ;"'::- III,,,, " ~; I , !q I 1 ~ 2 ~ j iI : granted at the discretion of the correctional institution or the par'o)e board. I ! c ..Jm parole~ 14% had been reincarcerated for various offenceS 9% had failed for It is a legal requirement. If the ' public wishes it remo~ed~ par)iament. not I f rn breach of their parole agreement and the last 7% were continuing on parole. the correctional system would be the instrument for change. I (JUI' Regular pa~ole. Another third of an inmate's sentence includes the [ pay parole and temporary absence. Day paro1e ~is a modified form of parole used to enable some in~ates to further their studies or training in the possibility of a paro 1e. Full Parole cannot be gra~ted t~ most inmates until IT~ community or to undertake employment. These inmates return to the institution they have served one-third of their s'entences, or: 7 years~ whichevel~ is [ m ,periodically, often every evening. Day parole is sometimes used as a testing shorter. In the case of certain violent offences, an inmate i~ not e)igibl~ ! ' I , , ground for potential parolees and is sometimes granted a few months before for parole until he has served one-half of 'this senten~e r~ther than one- lii H! consideration for full parole.