pic_08

o

SRR

5

fe.

é::

8

¥

Ei

B

é

%

%

L

-

::

:

i

i

%2

;‘

.i

3

E

:;'

N

J

DR

.

DENIS CARROLL

RT. HON. G. LLO

D

Home

TEORGE,

RT. HON,

[LORD CHORLEY

Secretary

THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON CRIMINOLOGY

BEDFORD COLLEGE, LONDON

12th—18th September, 1955

SUMMARY OF

PROCEEDINGS

With an introduction

by

DR. H. MANNHEIM

Published by

The British Organising Committee

on behalf of

The International Society for Criminology

%

®

-b‘a;:

1957

N

%o,

far

|

]

\

=

\

Hiygryo N>

7

5 -

). Nr. aZib.e

7

77

<

"

* Stlm“*‘t

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY

EDGAR G. DUNSTAN AND CO.,

DRAYTON

HOUSE,

GORDON

STREET, LONDON W.C.I

CONTENTS

Page

Introduction.

Dr. Hermann Mannheim

Programme of the Congress

25

Opening Address: The Rt. Hon. Major G. Lloyd George,

P.C., M.P., Secretary of State for the

33

Home Department

Addresses by:

Professor M. Lopez-Rey, Representative

of the Secretary-General of the United

Nations

36

Dr.

Denis

Carroll,

President,

Inter-

national Society for Criminology and of

the Third International Congress on

Criminology

38

M. Jean Pinatel, Secretary-General, Inter-

national Society for Criminology

45

General Reports:

Section 1

Definitions of Recidivism

Professor Norval Morris

50

Les Définitions de la Récidive et leur

Importance pour les Statistiques

68

Professor Roland Grassberger

Section 11

The Forms of Recidivism

Professor Walter C. Reckless

88

Formes et Evolution du Récidivisme

Dr. C. H. Andersen

100

Section 111

Causes of Recidivism

Professor P. A. H. Baan

117

Section 1V

Pronostico del Recidivismo

Dr. Israel Drapkin

132

Prognosis of Recidivism

Professor Sheldon Glueck

149

Section V

Le Traitement des Récidivistes

M. Charles Germain

176

Treatment of Recidivism

Dr. Georg Stiirup

201

National Reports

226

Special Reports

229

233

List of Registered Members and Associates

INTRODUCTION

BY

HERMANN MANNHEIM

THE British Organising Committee of the Third International

Congress on Criminology has done me the honour of asking me to

contribute the introductory chapter to the present volume. In other,

happier, circumstances, this Introduction would have been written

by Dr. Denis Carroll in his double capacity as President of our

Society and of the Congress. His premature death on the 21st Nov-

ember, 1956, has been a grievous loss to us all; it has deprived us of

his wise counsel and inspiring leadership and it has also meant some

further delay in producing this volume. The British Organising Com-

mittee wishes to take this opportunity of paying the highest tribute

to its late Chairman for his brilliant and devoted work. It was he

who took the initiative in forming our Committee, who presided over

our meetings and was always willing to give practical help and

advice whenever needed. It is no exaggeration to say that without

Denis Carroll the London Congress of 1955 would not have taken

place.

For various reasons, notably because of the limited financial

resources at the disposal of the Organising Committee, and because

of the length of time which has unfortunately elapsed since the Con-

gress was held, the Organising Committee had, reluctantly, to decide

to include in this official publication only the General Reports sub-

mitted to the five Sections of the Congress, together with the Resolu-

tions passed by these Sections; the opening and closing addresses; a

complete list of the participants as well as of the individual papers

received, indicating the places where some of the latter have in the

meantime been published. We are pleased to know that so many

of these papers, some of them substantial contributions to the prob-

lem of recidivism, have actually been printed. To reproduce the

Congress discussions, whether in Plenary Sessions, in the Sections,

or in Specialist Meetings, proved impossible for the reasons indicated

above. While this is, no doubt, a serious omission, we trust our

difficulties will be understood by our members.

Even in this greatly restricted form, the present volume could not

have been published without the generous financial help received

7

from the International Society for Criminology and from His

Honour, Chief Judge John Biggs, Jun., of the United States Court of

Appeals, Third Judicial Circuit, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. On

behalf of the British Organising Committee, it is my pleasant duty

to acknowledge this generosity and also to express our warmest

thanks for the untiring help received from the General Secretary of

the International Society, Professor Jean Pinatel, Paris, and from the

Honorary Scientific Secretary of the Congress, Mr. Hugh J. Klare,

London, Secretary of the Howard League, whose advice and assist-

ance in compiling and editing the present material, and conducting

the negotiations with contributors and printers, has been invaluable.

Moreover, we are most grateful to the General Rapporteurs, to the

Chairmen and Secretaries of the five Sections, to those eminent

persons who honoured us by addressing the opening and closing

sessions, and to all those who kindly submitted valuable individual

papers (numbering 56). If the Congress, which was attended by

more than four hundred members from forty-four countries, can

be regarded as a success, it 1s due to them. My personal thanks are

also due to Dr. R. G. Andry for the help he gave me in many ways

during the Congress.

The decision of the Scientific Committee of the International

Society for Criminology to devote its Third Congress largely to the

subject of Recidivism was a wise one. It was justified in the light

of the work done by previous international gatherings, and it was

proved to be right in view of what was achieved by the Congress of

1955 itself. It is true that questions relating to recidivism and to the

treatment of habitual criminals had been debated by several inter-

national Congresses before, and contributions of great importance

had been made. To mention only a few of them, thirty years before,

also in London, the Ninth Congress of the International Penal and

Penitentiary Commission had on its programme questions such as

whether the indeterminate sentence should be applied in the struggle

against recidivism, and “if some special form of detention be adopted

as a means of repression with regard to certain recidivists, by what

authority should such detention be pronounced and in what manner

should it be executed?”’ The Prague Congress of 1930 again dealt

with the question of “‘measures of security’’, including the internment

of habitual criminals; the Berlin Congress of 1935 with the difference

between the execution of penalties and that of measures of security;

and “the treatment and release of habitual offenders’ was also one

of the subjects discussed at The Hague in 1950. It was only natural

that in these Congresses held under the auspices of the International

Penal and Penitentiary Commission the main emphasis should have

8

been on the penal treatment of the habitual criminal, and in par-

ticular on the vexed question of punishment versus ‘“measures of

security’’, whereas matters of more criminological interest, such as

the definition and causes of recidivism were brought in only incident-

ally. Planning the Congress of 1955, the Scientific Committee of the

International Society for Criminology found itself faced with a

position where it could be truly said that, in spite of the existence of

an ever-growing literature and of the collection of much valuable

material on points of detail, especially those relating to treatment, no

attempt had so far been made by a representative international

gathering to tackle the whole subject of recidivism in all its aspects,

and it was this kind of all-round discussion that the Committee had

in mind when dividing its preparative work into five Sections:

Definitions of Recidivism and statistical aspects.

Descriptive Study of forms of Recidivism and their evolution.

Causes of Recidivism.

Prognosis of Recidivism.

Wn Wk —

Treatment of Recidivism.

From the point of view of pure logic, hardly anything needs to be

sald in explanation or defence of this classification. Practical experi-

ence, however, has shown that while for methodological reasons the

distinction of descriptive and causative aspects was essential, their

simultaneous discussion in one single Section might have been prefer-

able, which would have reduced the Congress Symphony to its

traditional four movements. On the other hand, the two subjects

allotted to Section I proved to be so difficult and comprehensive that

each of them might well have been treated in a separate Section.

Moreover, some members greatly interested in the subject of defini-

tion were not particularly attracted by statistics, and vice versa. As

it was, some participants with a particular interest in the promotion

of more refined techniques of measuring the actual extent of recidi-

vism may have felt somewhat disappointed. Moreover, a certain

amount of overlapping was inevitable, and it could also be argued

that, in a sense, the work of the other Sections was dependent on the

definition of recidivism to be offered by Section I, whereas the

statistical side of the work of the Section should not have anticipated

the results of Sections II-V, with their various pleas for statistical

information. This Congress, in common with most others, suffered

from the, it seems inevitable, disadvantage of having all its move-

ments played simultaneously.

Every effort was made to safeguard the multi-disciplinary character

of the Congress. For each Section, except Section I where both

9

General Reports were written by lawyers, two General Rapporteurs

were appointed from different disciplines and between them repre-

sentative of most of the disciplines contributing to criminological

research. Professor J. J. Panakal (India) was unfortunately prevented

from submitting his report on the sociological causes of recidivism

(Section III). Of the nine General Rapporteurs whose reports were

received, three were lawyers, four psychiatrists, one was a sociologist

and one a penal administrator. Moreover, as the programme shows,

psychiatric, psychological, sociological, legal and penological papers

were carefully balanced in Plenary and other Sessions. Clearly, no

criminological problem is more in need of such a balanced and multi-

disciplinary approach than recidivism. Only in this way can a con-

ciliation be achieved, for example, between the one extreme of an

uncompromisingly penal interpretation of that concept which

would demand increased penalties indiscriminately for any convicted

person committing further offences, and the other extreme of an

equally uncompromising psychiatric interpretation that would

regard the commission of such further offences merely as a normal

stage in the natural development of the offender’s personality.

This multi-disciplinary approach, indispensable in the theory and

practice of any national system, becomes absolutely vital wherever

criminology enters the international field. In his impressive opening

address, M. Pinatel rightly charged the Congress with the task of

co-ordinating the work of biologists, psychologists and sociologists,

and, we might add, of lawyers and psychiatrists, in an atmosphere of

freedom congenial to scientific gatherings.

To those who, like the present writer, could attend the discussions

of only one of the five Sections, it is impossible to do full justice to

the work of the Congress in its entirety.! My excuse for trying to give

this assessment is that most other participants, too, must have

suffered from the same disadvantage. Even so, however, 1 am fully

aware that in the following remarks I may have relied too heavily

on the printed General Reports and Resolutions at the expense of the

National Reports and the spoken word. The Resolutions passed by a

Congress should, of course, truly reflect the total sum of experience

and wisdom derived jointly from the General Reports, based on the

National Reports, plus the discussions. Actually, having been

reduced to the barest minimum of space, these Resolutions can give

no complete picture of the wealth of ideas expressed in the dis-

cussions, and represent all too often nothing but compromise solu-

tions, satisfying nobody. While this general experience of political

1 See also my comments in The British Journal of Delinquency, Vol. VI, No. 3,

January 1956, pp. 222 et seq.

10

Conferences and scientific Congresses may, to some extent, have

repeated .itself in the formulation of our Resolutions, it can be

claimed that, to those in particular who can read between the lines,

these few pages seem to reflect a good deal of progress towards a

better understanding of the many problems of the Congress. It can

also be said that the General Rapporteurs have taken great pains to

incorporate in their work that of their colleagues who had submitted

reports for their respective countries.

Section I. A. Definition. As Major Lloyd George (now Viscount

Tenby), in his opening address as Home Secretary at the time of the

Congress, pointed out, at least in English law “recidivism’ is not a

term of art. “It has no precise significance in penal practice, and 1s

to be found in no statute or statutory regulation.” In other legal

systems the position is different, but there is no uniformity in these

differences. French lawyers distinguish between ‘“‘récidive’, a term

used in legal language to describe the criminal act of a person who

has already been convicted of an offence, and “récidivism’, which

connotes a general phenomenon. In German law, the term ““ Riickfall”

covers both aspects of the matter, but has been given a specific tech-

nical meaning in the present Criminal Code. Regardless of such

differences, however, it is probably true to say that “recidivism” is

the widest term available to describe the subject which the Congress

was expected to discuss, and for this reason alone it has to be

regarded as the most suitable choice. It was the task of Section I to

clarify the various possible meanings and sub-divisions within this

all-embracing term, and to recommend the adoption of the definition

most likely to be useful for the various objectives of Criminology.

In one of the General Reports (Professor Morris) it is argued that,

by allotting the task of defining this term to Section I, the Organising

Committee seems to have indicated that only a preliminary nominal

definition was expected, and in a sense this is true. To produce a

““final”’ definition might indeed have meant anticipating and cover-

ing the whole work of the other four Sections. Nevertheless, it has to

be borne in mind that this Congress did not start from scratch, but

had to work against a background of a long history of scientific

endeavour. Meeting simultaneously with the other Sections, the first

Section was unable to profit from their deliberations, but even so its

discussions inevitably included many other aspects of far more than

purely ‘“nominal” significance. The official Resolution, a child of

compromise between opposing views, hardly reflects the real scope

of the work of the Section.

In one important question, however, complete agreement was

easily reached: ‘“‘For different purposes criminologists need different

11

definitions of recidivism.” One might possibly criticise the use of the

word “‘criminologists

What is meant and was clearly expressed in

both General Reports is that for different purposes different defini-

tions are required by different people. There is much to be said in

favour of the threefold distinction suggested by Professor Morris

but a few slight modifications of his terminology might perhaps

recommend themselves. What Morris calls “penal definition” is, as

he clearly shows, in fact only the definition used by prison admini-

strators who are not representative of the whole of the ‘“penal”

system. On the other hand, his use of the term ‘criminological

definition” appears too narrow, as criminologists are not only inter-

ested in persons who commit crimes after a previous conviction or

still narrower, in “‘the failures of our correctional methods’’. Crimino-

logists are also interested in those offenders who never appear before

a court or corresponding agency. The Resolution tries to com-

promise by using the formula “convicted or in any other way dealt

with officially by society”’, and it can be admitted that to a Congress

studying ‘“Recidivism” the most pressing and practical problem is

that of how to deal with those who persist in crime in spite of having

been convicted or in other ways dealt with officially by society. This

however, is a penological, rather than a criminological, definition

which latter should not be limited to cases dealt with officially. The

undetected

recidivist

too, has his problems: one has only to

consider the practising homosexual who has never been in contact

with any agency of the state or society. The following trichotomy

might therefore be preferable: (1) the wider, criminological definition

independent of any legal or social reaction to the previous crime

(2) the legal, requiring conviction; (3) the penological, requiring in

addition penal treatment, possibly w1th a sub-section requiring prison

treatment.

Medical analogles it seems to be agreed, are of little use, and

whether or not *“‘relapse” in the medical sense means that the same

causal factors producing the original illness have also to be present

in the subsequent one, such identity of causes is usually not required

in our field. The Resolution, in referring to the ““dangerous state” as a

characteristic of the

recidivist lato sensu

may, however, have

something similar in mind. Again, the prevailing view excludes

the conviction for multiple offences from the legal conception of

recidivism; in a criminological definition 1t would, of course, have to

be included.

An interesting point, to my knowledge never before discussed, is

whether and how far the conception of recidivism might possibly be

extended to crimes committed by different members of a group: to

12

give an illustration, A, B, C, D, E and so on are on strike; A and B

are fined for acts of violence committed in connection with the strike,

the judge—as actually happened in London at the time of writing

giving a warning that further offences committed by members of the

group would be more severely dealt with; subsequently, the same

kind of offence is committed by C and D. How far can the arguments

usually applied to recidivism on the part of an individual equally be

applied to such actions by members of a group? In view of the

growing criminological significance of the group the matter would

seem to require further consideration.

None of the numerous legal points discussed in the General

Reports, some of them admittedly of greater importance to the

legislator and the courts than to the criminologist, are mentioned in

the Resolution, and there were in fact too many of them to be

properly discussed and voted upon: specificity, length of interval,

number of previous convictions, foreign convictions, mandatory or

discretionary increase of punishment, definition of habitual and pro-

fessional crime? Some of these questions belong to the Section on

Treatment rather than to that on Definition, and have been treated

there; others seem to have fallen between two stools.

B. Statistics. The history of this subject over the sixty years has

not been a very happy one. As Ernst Roesner shows in his detailed

and scholarly article in the Handwdrterbuch der Kriminologie, the

important work done by Koebner at the end of the last, and by

Finkelnburg at the beginning of the present, century has not had the

expected results. International Congresses have been mainly con-

nected with international prison statistics, and it is largely due to the

work of Grassberger, quoted in his Report, that interest in the

subject as a whole has been revived. For the Criminal Statistics of

England and Wales, the present writer had asked for data on

recidivism, omitted since 1914, to be reintroduced (Social Aspects of

Crime in England between the Wars. 1940), and it is encouraging to

see that at least a certain minimum of information is now again

available. It is also worthy of note that, according to the National

Report for Sweden, an improved system is now being introduced in

that country, apparently somewhat on the lines recommended by

Koebner sixty years ago.

How far can it be said that the London Congress has given a

fillip to this long-neglected subject? As hinted above, the fact that it

was coupled with ‘“Definition” deprived it of much of the time

needed for proper discussion, but at least an attempt was made to

sort out its most urgent aspects. The Resolution deals with three of

them:

13

(@) The difference between purely descriptive statistics and

““statistics related to action” as an example of “operational research’:

descriptive statistics, i.e. the collection of data, mainly from official

sources and by official agencies, on a variety of factors regarded as

useful in a general way and possibly facilitating international com-

parisons, on the one hand; and statistical research undertaken for

specific purposes, often by private research workers collecting their

own material, and possibly leading to specific action in the field of

penal reform, on the other. The mere collection of data, for example,

on the proportion of convicted persons, or of prisoners with previous

convictions or previous prison sentences, might give an interesting

general picture of the apparent effect of convictions or of sentences of

imprisonment. Such material would be too general, however, to lead

to any kind of specific action. ““Research for action”, based on the

ad hoc collection of data on carefully selected samples and showing

the rate of success for institutions of one type as against the rate of

success for the same type of offender in institutions of a different

type, e.g. for open against closed Borstal Institutions, might lead to

appropriate action, i.e. an increasing use of open Borstals. The

Resolution rightly states that the present trend is in favour of

““statistics related to action”, and in referring to the use of prediction

techniques it foreshadows the Resolution of Section IV. However,

the use of more refined statistical techniques, vital in research on the

prediction of recidivism and on sentencing policy, is hardly less

essential in other research on recidivism, including that into its causes.

(b) Attention is drawn to the clash of interests likely to arise

between modern legislation facilitating the rehabilitation of the

recidivist and the needs of criminological research for the preserva-

tion of case records. To deal more fully with this important problem,

recently discussed at the Hague Congress of the International Penal

and Penitentiary Commission, 1950, was not within the terms of

reference of the Section.

(c) Some thought was given, however, to the eternal difficulties of

international criminal statistics. The recommendation that a Com-

mittee should be formed by the International Society for Criminology

to report on ‘“‘minimum objectives and standards’ is welcome, and

it is hoped that it will soon be implemented. In its work, this Com-

mittee will have to bear in mind the point rightly made in the English

National Report that “statistics are at present collected on the basis

of only vague ideas of what criminologists would like to have before

them; a co-operative effort is needed . . . to prevent the misuse of

effort in collecting statistics that will not be needed’. This places the

responsibility squarely on the shoulders of the criminologist who has

14

most carefully to consider what sort of data should be given priority

as being really essential for the purposes of penal reform. Only in the

second place, if at all, should information be requested from official

agencies that is not essential but might be interesting to a few research

workers. As long as vital, practical information is still lacking,

criminology is not yet in a position to afford the luxury of lart

pour ’art. On the other hand, by collecting data on important char-

acteristics of the recidivist, Criminal Statistics can usefully supple-

ment the more individual aspects of the ‘“‘evolution of recidivism”

treated by Section II.

Section II. This seems to have been the first time that an Inter-

national Congress, or possibly any large gathering of criminologists,

has had on its Agenda the “forms and evolution’ of recidivism™, its

“symptomatology’’, as distinct from its etiology.

One of the first statements made in the brief Resolution

‘is the

concession made to Section III that “‘the forms of recidivism, con-

sidered from the point of view of the dynamics of criminal behaviour,

cannot realistically be separated from the study of the causes of

recidivism”. And both General Reports, as well as many of the

National Reports, show quite clearly that, in spite of every effort to

remain within the boundaries of pure description, the temptation to

trespass upon the neighbouring field of dealing with behaviour in

terms of explanation, ‘‘understanding” and causation was too strong

to be resisted. Our problem is whether it should be resisted. While, as

pointed out before, the wisdom of having a separate Section for the

descriptive treatment of our subject might be open to doubt, it seems

unquestionable that special attention had to be given to this aspect as

distinct from causation. This is not the place to go more fully into the

philosophical implications of the distinction. Among others, Dr. 1. O.

Wisdom in his Foundations of Inference in Natural Science (1952)

has admirably dealt with the “descriptive interpretation’, whose

fault, he concludes, lies in the “narrowness of its claim”, and it is

true enough that “scientists are imbued with a desire to find explana-

tions”. In the sphere of criminological research, and even more

specifically in that of prediction studies, the same plea for “under-

standing™, not as a substitute for, but as a complement to, a purely

descriptive, statistical approach has been made by Gordon Rose and

others. As far as the work of our Congress is concerned, however, it

is not the causative but rather the descriptive side that is on the

defensive. The strongest argument in its favour is the practical one

that the treatment of recidivists cannot wait until the last doubts as

to its causes have been resolved. “We shall never know the ultimate

‘causes’ of delinquency or recidivism, for they are myriad and their

15

inter-relationships even more numerous. In this situation, the

development of ‘objective’ indicators is of great importance, but this

must not be confused with the development of understanding, to

which they do not necessarily contribute.”” (Rose.) This concession

on the part of the “causalists’ is all that is needed to justify this part

of the work of the Congress.

For the study of “forms and evolution”, three different techniques

can be used: the statistical technique, the case history and—standing

between them—-the typological technique. The first being taken care

of by Sections I and IV, it proved possible to concentrate on the other

two techniques. One form of typology is, of course, the etiological

one which, strictly speaking, was the domain of Section III. Causative

factors are actually absent neither from the distinction, made in the

Resolution, between two ‘‘groups” or, rather, types of recidivists,

nor from Professor Reckless’s central theme: ‘“What produces

incapacity for playing acceptable roles in life?”” and one of his criteria

of classification is indeed the etiological one. The same is true of

Dr. Andersen’s General Report and some of the National Reports.

Notwithstanding this methodological stumbling block, the material

presented is of great value to the future of descriptive and, in particu-

lar, typological studies of recidivism, and the same is true of the

final part of the Resolution with its emphasis on team work and on

improved and uniform case history record forms. Its recommenda-

tion is in very wide terms, going somewhat beyond the scope of

“forms and evolution’’, but boldly tackling some of the most intricate

methodological problems in criminological research: the “scientific

and practical conditions” required by “teams of competent workers”.

If such a Sub-committee should ever be established, it might perhaps

add to its formidable tasks another, slightly different, one, i.e. to

study the scientific and practical conditions under which teams of

competent workers from different disciplines can harmoniously work

together.

Section III. No specific request for any action on the part of the

International Society is made in the very detailed Resolution of

Section 1II. Any plea it has to make is addressed to Society in general

and its members rather than to the criminologist. Obviously, the

work of this Section was deeply influenced by the warm humanity

of its only General Rapporteur, Professor Baan, who, in what

resembles a Rhapsody rather than a conventional ‘“Report” throws

out challenge after challenge to the timid traditionalist and to all

those who delight in futile classifications, generalisations, abstrac-

tions and searches for *“the” cause of crime. Going even beyond the

wide definition of recidivism suggested above, he wishes to include

16

even those who have repeatedly offended against the ‘‘general

standards on which a well-organised community is based”. This may

seem to be nothing but the logical conclusion from Sellin’s widely

accepted view that violators not only of legal but also of social

norms should form the object of criminological study, but for

tactical reasons and in view of the limited resources at the disposal of

criminologists it might be advisable for the time being to concentrate

on the study of those who violate norms of the criminal law. This

does not rule out studies of the kind envisaged by Professor Baan.

That a scholar of his temperament should himself occasionally in-

dulge in slightly dangerous generalisations has perhaps to be accepted

as inevitable. We do not quarrel with him when he tells us that

“statistics are really repugnant to me’”. Nobody can in fairness

expect a great clinician to be much interested in statistical techniques,

however vital they may be here as in so many other subjects, includ-

ing medicine. As stated in the Resolution, no agreement could be

reached within the Section, and the same also applies to other

Sections, with regard to the characteristics and even the very exist-

ence, of the “professional” criminal. According to Baan, this concept

is a mere myth, a relic of the Psychologie ohne Seele. Actually, the

gulf between the opposing views may not be quite as wide and un-

bridgeable as it appeared in the heat of the Congress. Professor

Baan’s report on his one thousand cases from the “Dr. van der

Hoeven Kliniek” will no doubt provide much useful material in

support of his views, but it should be supplemented by corresponding

studies from other countries with different social and economic con-

ditions. Such investigations should be linked to the work of the Sub-

Committees to be established in accordance with the Resolutions of

Sections [ and II.

One of the most difficult tasks before Section I1I was the distinction

between causes of crime and causes of recidivism, but, while the

former could not be altogether excluded from its work, the emphasis

has rightly been on the latter. This inevitably produced some over-

lapping with the discussions of Section V, as mistakes made in the

sphere of treatment are universally regarded as among the strongest

factors in recidivism. And indeed, those parts of Professor Baan’s

Report dealing with treatment and requiring in particular that the

offender should be given a chance of developing and “‘assimilating”

his feelings of guilt instead of suppressing them as a reaction to

wrong penal treatment, mi

ght well be placed into the hands of every

judge and penal administ

rator. The fact, referred to by Professors

Glueck and van Bemmelen and already stressed by Franz von Liszt

in 1898 in his famous paper Das Verbrechen als sozial-pathologische

17

CC-B

Erscheinung, that the danger of relapse increases after each conviction,

makes it imperative to pay special attention to the criminogenic

effects of the penal system.

Section IV. The decision to devote a whole Section to ‘“Prognosis’’,

which term was, of course, meant to include both clinical prognosis

and statistical prediction, was bold and imaginative, and has paid

ample dividends. It forced, for the first time in the history of Crimino-

logy, a representative international gathering to come to grips with

this most topical subject and to take sides for or against the whole

idea of statistical prediction. The Resolution, brief but meaningful,

constitutes an indisputable victory for that idea, and it is highly

encouraging that the Section, and with it the Congress, have so

strongly backed the work carried out by private research workers for

more than thirty years. This victory has not been, and could not be,

won without a battle. There was room for differences on various

points, but it is rather sad to observe that all-too-many of those old,

and long-discredited, arguments against statistical prediction seem to

have been raised again. Familiar bogies such as that ‘“‘sentencing is an

art, not a science” (it is, of course, both), or that statistical prediction

may do injustice to the individual, and similar ones, made their

appearance in spite of the admirably clear and convincing treatment

in Professor Glueck’s Report. (His reply to Overbeek could hardly

be improved upon!) This explains why the Resolution had to make

the obvious point that prediction devices should not be applied auto-

matically. As has been written time and again, prediction tables are

intended to be no more than one tool among many to assist judges

and administrators in the exercise of their discretion, and they should

be operated only by professional, skilled workers who have to place

the results before those charged with the administration of criminal

justice. The objections raised against the principle of statistical pre-

diction are as out-of-date as those raised against any kind of scientific

evidence, be it finger-prints or electro-encephalogram. Even the com-

petition between clinical and statistical prediction methods has been

peacefully settled thanks to the work of such writers as Paul Meehl, in

his Clinical v. Statistical Prediction. ‘““The statistician begins where

the clinician leaves off in some things, and in others the clinician

should begin where the statistician left off” (Wilkins). There is ample

room for both, and it is a welcome sign of progress to find this view

endorsed in the General Reports of two eminent clinicians, Drs.

Drapkin and Stiirup. Nevertheless, there are still a good many

clinicians left who are in need of Professor Glueck’s reminder that

“good clinical prognosis is dependent on the expert having gone

through an unconscious or conscious statistical process’.

18

As the English prediction study, Prediction Methods in relation to

Borstal Training, by H. Mannheim and Leslie T. Wilkins, was not

available in time to be considered by the General Rapporteurs, the

present writer may be forgiven if he takes this opportunity of com-

menting upon one or two of Professor Glueck’s benevolent criticisms,

based upon the necessarily brief summary given in Mr. Wilkins’s and

Dr. Peter Scott’s National Reports. There is, above all, his view that

our insistence on improved statistical techniques, this “‘excessive pre-

occupation with mathematical refinements” has ‘“‘something in it of

empbhasis of form over substance”. This raises, first, the fundamental

question of the place of methodology in criminological, or, for that

matter, any other research: can there be any worthwhile “substance”

as long as the “form”, the technique of producing this substance,

remains questionable? The answer should not appear doubtful to

those who have devoted so much ceaseless effort to improvements of

their techniques as the Gluecks. Moreover, the study of our book will

convince Professor Glueck that we have in fact paid at least as much

attention to ‘“‘such basic ‘bread-and-butter’ problems as the improve-

ment of the soundness of the raw materials” as we have given to

statistical refinements. In fact, considerable sections of our Borstal

Prediction study are entirely devoted to this ‘‘bread-and-butter”

problem.

Secondly, have we really ‘‘shied away from the concept of

‘cause’ ”’, and is there always a ‘“high probability” that statistical

correlation means “functional relationship”, even though “one

cannot as yet trace the specific and subtle links in the chain of

causation”? It is just because we have only too often discovered the

spurious quality of statistical correlations that we have become so

critical. It is, of course, true that “the causal sequence can be ration-

ally tested by experiments”, but the latter are often costly and time-

consuming, and by the time their results become available, the con-

fusion between spurious correlations and real causes may already

have led to a faulty theory. No more has to be said on this point.

Here, as in our previous remarks (Section II), our plea is not for a

monopoly of statistical and descriptive techniques but for a certain

minimum of safeguards against the tyranny of the ‘“‘causalists”.

A point of great practical importance, going far beyond the scope

of our present subject, has been incidentally made by Professor

Glueck when he writes: “Wherever possible, check-ups on the extent

of recidivism should be made by neutral investigators, interested only

in objective scientific research rather than in propagandising the

supposed efficiency of some peno-correctional device or institution.”

This raises the whole question of ““inside™ versus “outside™ research

19

which, sooner or later, might well engage the attention of the Inter-

national Society for Criminology. It is perhaps not so much the

danger of actual bias on the part of ‘“‘inside” research workers—a

danger no doubt greatly reduced by the higher qualifications and

improved professional training nowadays required—but the risk of

their being suspected of bias by outside opinion. This will have to

be taken into account whenever an attempt is made to draw the line

between research done ‘‘inside’’ and research left to outside bodies or

individuals.

Section V. Itis in the field of treatment that this Congress has found

it more difficult than anywhere else to produce new material and new

ideas. This was the fault neither of the two outstanding General

Reports, nor of the discussion: it was inherent in the nature of the

subject. The treatment of the recidivist, especially of the habitual

criminal, has so often figured on the Agenda of International Con-

gresses and been so widely treated in penological literature that it is

not easy to avoid commonplaces. However, it is the unmistakable

undertone of disappointment and frustration apparent in M. Ger-

main’s General Report as well as in parts of the Resolution that is so

disquieting. “One should expect initiative, experiences, reforms,”

writes M. Germain, ‘““‘which would mean a fundamental difference in

the treatment of recidivists as compared with that of offenders in

general, but this is not the impression which one receives when look-

ing at developments in different countries.” And, in a similar vein,

the Resolution observes that ‘“On the whole we know what is

essential’ as far as the legal side of the matter is concerned, and in

most countries the administration, too, ‘‘is conscious of the need to

provide suitable methods for dealing with recidivists”, but “such

methods are not sufficient in modern treatment”. Even so, the

Resolution makes a few points that badly needed repeating. To give

only one illustration, more than a hundred years ago, one of the

greatest European criminal lawyers of the nineteenth century,

C.J. A. Mittermaier, in one of his Notes to Anselm von Feuerbach’s

text book of the Peinliche Recht (14th ed. 1847) took already the view

that it would be unjustifiable for the legislator to make higher

penalties for recidivists mandatory. “In view of the state of our

prisons, of our penal system and our general conditions,” he writes,

“it is not seldom the State itself that is responsible for the offender’s

relapse, and it would be unfair to postulate a general presumption

that every recidivist as such is particularly immoral and dangerous.

A good law should leave it to the discretion of the judge to increase

the penalty in case of recidivism and this only where the ordinary

penalty does not seem to be adequate™ (§ 132%). Prisons, the penal

20

system and the general conditions of fhe masses, it is true, have

vastly improved in recent times, but in its essentials Mittermaier’s

appeal for judicial discretion is still a matter to be heeded by law-

givers in many countries, and it is good that the Congress has ex-

pressed itself unreservedly against any automatic increase in length

or severity of penalties. Welcome is also the great emphasis on pro-

fessional training and treatment and, in particular, on the need to

tackle the prisoner’s feeling of “loneliness’ by making him a member

of the treatment team. Here we can see the effect of Dr. Stiirup’s

impressive General Report and of the work done by his team at

Herstedvester, by Maxwell Jones at Belmont, and by Baan at

Utrecht. In some respects, however, the recommendations in the

documents submitted to, or emanating from, this Section, give the

impression of being too far removed from reality to be directly

applicable in practice. It is all very well to recommend that ‘‘the same

staff should be in charge of the treatment in the institution and during

parole”, but only in exceptional circumstances and in small countries

will this be workable and the ideal be reached that ‘‘the officer super-

vising after-care be part of the team”. That working hours, machinery

and supervision in prison should be as ‘“‘average” as possible is

admirable as an ideal, but often very difficult to achieve. On the other

hand, if a “continuation of friendship started in a prison is regarded

as “‘safe’” only when the “‘criminal profession” of the two friends is

very different, how can such timidity be reconciled with more pro-

gressive views on after-care? Mention might have been made in the

Resolution of such small-scale, but vitally important, experiments in

after-care as Norman House in London, where discharged and home-

less prisoners can live together even if their offences are of the same

kind. For large-scale efforts, neither the money nor the personnel are

as yet available, and in spite of many improvements in matters of

detail, it is still true that in some ways we still try to treat twentieth-

century crime with eighteenth-century weapons—not perhaps as far

as its technical side is concerned, but in its psychological and socio-

logical problems. In this subject of recidivism, in particular, the whole

problem of the identity and development of the human personality 1s

involved—is not the “five years interval” which plays such an im-

portant part in many

legal definitions of recidivism a true symbol of

the inadequacy of o

ur methods of solving it? The Resolution, in

admitting the existen

recommending that

ce of important gaps in our knowledge and in

an international group should be formed to

exchange case histori

€s—a group which, by the way, might well be

joined together with

the Sub-committee suggested by Section 11—

makes at least a move in the right direction.

21

These brief comments —wholly inadequate as they are to do justice

to the work of the Congress-—are mainly intended to press one vital

point: Very little will have been achieved if this work is regarded as

coming to an end with the publication of this volume of Reports and

Resolutions. Much can be achieved if 1t 1s treated as an Overture,

as the beginning of a new chapter, as an invitation to further thought,

experiment, and action.

22

CONGRESS OFFICIALS

PRESIDENT

DR. DENIS CARROLL

VICE-PRESIDENTS

PROFESSOR THORSTEN SELLIN

PROFESSOR P. GRISPIGNI

PROFESSOR GREGORY ZILBOORG

PROFESSOR J. M. KUMARAPPA

PROFESSOR OSVALDO LOUDET

BRITISH ORGANISING COMMITTEE

DR. DENIS CARROLL (Chairman)

SIR CYRIL BURT

DR. R. SEssioNs HODGE

LORD CHORLEY

MR. HuUGH J. KLARE

Miss MARGERY Fry

PROFESSOR AUBREY LEWIS

DR. T. C. N. GIBBENS

Dr. HERMANN MANNHEIM

DR. EDWARD GLOVER

LORD MERTHYR

DR. Max GRUNHUT

DRrR. LEON RADZINOWICZ

PROFESSOR J. PINATEL (co-opted)

CHAIRMAN OF PROGRAMME SUB-COMMITTEE

DR. HERMANN MANNHEIM

HON. SCIENTIFIC SECRETARY

MR. HUGH J. KLARE

ORGANISING SECRETARY AND TREASURER

MR. H. O. Cox

23

Section 1. Definitions of Recidivism and their Statistical Aspects

Chairman:

DR. HERMANN MANNHEIM (U.K.)

Vice-Chairman:

DR. K. O. CHRISTIANSEN (Denmark)

Secretary:

DRr. GrYGIER (U.K.)

General Rapporteurs:

PrOF. R. GRASSBERGER (Austria)

PRrROF. N. MORRIS (Australia)

Section 2. Descriptive study of forms of Recidivism and their evolution

Chairman:

PrOF. R. SIEVERTS (Germany)

Vice-Chairman:

M. J-B. HERZOG (France)

Secretaries:

MME. DR. GALY (France)

Pror. P. Lesins (U.S.A))

DRr. C. H. ANDERSEN (Belgium)

General Rapporteurs:

PrROF. W. RECKLESS (U.S.A.)

Section 3. Causes of Recidivism

Chairman:

PROF. J. ANDENAES (Norway)

Vice-Chairman:

PROF. PERE MAILLOUX (Canada)

Secretaries:

DR. J. SPENCER (U.K.)

DR. W. DOLEISCH (Austria)

General Rapporteur:

PrROF. P. A. H. BAAN (Netherlands)

Section 4. Prognosis of Recidivism

Chairman:

ProOF. E. FREY (Switzerland)

Vice-Chairman:

ProF. G. T. KEMPE (Netherlands)

Secretaries:

Dr. W. H. NAGEL (Netherlands)

MR. P. KUENSTLER (U.K.)

General Rapporteurs:

DR. I. DRAPKIN (Chile)

ProF. S. GLUECK (U.S.A))

Section 5. Treatment of Recidivism

Chairman:

Pror. B. D1 TuLLio (Italy)

Vice-Chairman:

M. vaN HELMONT (Belgium)

Secretaries:

M. M. BrLANC (France)

MRr. G. Rose (U.K.)

General Rapporteurs:

M. C. GErMAIN (France)

DRr. G. SturuUP (Denmark)

24

CONGRESS PROGRAMME:

MONDAY, 12th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.30 a.m. — 12.00 noon

OFFICIAL OPENING OF THE CONGRESS

by

MAjor THE RT. HON. GwiLYM LLOYD-GEORGE, P.C., M.P.

Secretary of State for the Home Department

and Minister for Welsh Affairs

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS

by

DRr. DENIS CARROLL

SPEECHES OF WELCOME

by

DR. MANUEL LoPEZ-REY

Representing the Secretary- General, United Nations

M. JEAN PINATEL

General Secretary of the International Society for Criminology

25

MONDAY, 12th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Afternoon

2.30 p.m. - 4.30 p.m.

SECTIQN MEETINGS

Introduction

Introduction

Discussion

Section 1

b

by

of

Prof. R. Grassberger

Prof. N. Morris

General Reports

Introduction

Introduction

Discussion

Section 2

b

b

of

Prof. W.

)i{eckless

Dr. C. H. Andersen

General Reports

Introduction

Discussion

Section 3

b

of

Prof. P. A. H. Baan

General Reports

Introduction

Introduction

Discussion

Section 4

b

by

of

Prof. S. Glueck

Dr. 1. Drapkin

General Reports

Introduction

Introduction

Discussion

Section 5

by

by

of

M.Ch. Germain

Dr. G. Sturup

General Reports

5.00 p.m. - 6.00 p.m.

LECTURES FOLLOWED BY DISCUSSION

Room 115

Room 99

Room 97

Dr. Brousseau

Dr. Vladimir Hadzi

Dr. L. Rubinstein

“Correlation between

“The individualisation

““Case history of a

recidivism and func-

recidivist thief.”

tional or anatomical

of after-care.”

changes of the brain.”

Room 121

Room 134

Dr. Eleanor Glueck

Dr. Marcel Frym

“The status of the Glueck

“The treatment of Recidivism.”’

Prediction Studies.”

9.00 p.m.

RECEPTION BY

THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF LONDON UNIVERSITY

26

TUESDAY, 13th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.00 a.m. - 12.30 p.m.

MEETINGS OF SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Further discussion of General Reports

Afternoon

2.30 p.m. - 4.15 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

SYMPOSIUM ON HOMICIDE

PrROFESSOR G. RYLANDER

“Psycho-sociological Study of Murderers

in Sweden”’

DR. J. A. HoBSON

“Emotional reaction of arrested murderers to

their crime, their trial and their sentence”

PROFESSOR M. WOLFGANG

“Murderers and their Victims”

(Read by PROFESSOR T. SELLIN)

5.00 p.m. — 6.00 p.m.

SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Further discussion of General Reports

27

WEDNESDAY, 14th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.

MEETINGS OF SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Further discussion of General Reports

11.15 a.m. - 12.30 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

PROFESSOR SHELDON T. GLUECK, and MRS. ELEANOR GLUECK

“Physique and Delinquency”

followed by discussion

Afternoon

VISITS TO INSTITUTIONS

28

THURSDAY, 15th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.00 a.m. — 12.30 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

Progress Reports by General Rapporteurs

Afternoon

2.30 p.m. - 4.15 p.m.

SPECIALIST MEETINGS

Room 97

Room 99

Dr. G. B. Smith

Professor T. Wiirtenberger

“Sex Offenders and Recidivism™

“International Aspects of Forgery

and

of Works of Art”

Dr. B. Glueck

and

!

Professor F. Castejon

“Sex Offenders—A Team Study”’

(Read by Mrs. 1. Lloyd Brandon)

“Recidivism and Banknote Forgery”

(Cancelled—speaker absent)

5.00 p.m. - 6.00 p.m.

LECTURES

Room 97

Room 99

Professors M. Verdun

Room 115

Dr. R. Banay

and G. Heuyer

Professor V. V. Stanciu

““An Anthropometric

“Masked Schizophrenic

*““The Criminality of

Study of Young and

Reactions and persistent

Adult Offenders.”

criminal behaviour.”

Unpunishables.”

Room 121

Dr. M. Schmideberg

Room 134

Professor C. V. Ferreira

“‘Specialised methods and techniques

“Ductless Glands and Recidivism.”

in the psychotherapy of delinquents.”

-

T —— e e

-—— —_—

7.30 p.m. for 8.00 p.m.

CONGRESS BANQUET

29

FRIDAY, 16th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.

MEETINGS OF SECTIONS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Final discussions

11.15 a.m. - 12.30 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

THE HoN. MR. JUSTICE BARRY

“Maconochie—An early Pioneer of Penal Treatment”

Afternoon

2.30 p.m. - 4.15 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

PROFESSOR MARSHALL B. CLINARD

“Frontiers of Research in Criminology”’

and

DR. GREGORY ZILBOORG

“The psychological and penological aspects of various

types of Recidivism”

5.00 p.m. - 6.00 p.m.

LECTURES

Room 99

Room 97

Dr. A. Bonnard

Room 115

Dr. H. Ritey

““Clinical Standards of

Professor E. Smigel

“The Psychological

Prognosis in Juvenile

“Public Attitudes

Background of

Delinquency—an after-

towards stealing.”

Recidivism.”

history study.”

Room 121

RECIDIVISM AND THE COMMUNITY

Hon. G. Koskoff

Room 134

“The Legislator and the problem

of recidivism”’

Dr. H. Berger

and

Dr. Leon Stern

“Recidivism in Narcotic Addiction.”

“The Treatment of Recidivism and

the attitude of the public.”

6.30 p.m. - 8.00 p.m.

COCKTAIL PARTY by BRITISH COUNCIL

65 Davies Street, W.1.

30

SATURDAY, 17th SEPTEMBER, 1955

Morning

10.00 a.m. - 11.00 a.m.

PLENARY SESSION

Closing Remarks by Sections Chairmen

11.15 a.m. - 12.30 p.m.

CLOSING SPEECHES

by

MME. ALVA MYRDAL

Director, Department of Social Sciences

U.N.E.S.C.O.

M. CHARLES GERMAIN

General Secretary of International Penal and

Penitentiary Foundation.

DR. DENIS CARROLL

President of International Society

for Criminology.

31

OPENING ADDRESS

by

RT. HON. MAJOR G. LLOYD-GEORGE, PC M.P.

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, I regard it as a privilege

to have been asked to open this Congress organised by the Inter-

national Society of Criminology and also a pleasure to welcome to

London so large a gathering, from all parts of the world, of persons

distinguished in the many branches of learning which in our times

are called on to contribute to the science of criminology.

Many of you have recently attended, in Geneva, the first World

Congress organised by the United Nations to consider certain

aspects of the prevention of crime and the treatment of offenders.

I have been much impressed by the reports which have reached me

of that meeting. It is very encouraging to me to know that so many

experts from so many countries should have been able to reach

agreement on the various subjects which were discussed. I sincerely

hope that this may be a good augury for your own more profound

and scientific exploration of a single aspect of this wide field. I have

no doubt that the results of your deliberations will be of great

interest and value throughout the world.

For at least 200 years questions concerning the prevention and

treatment of crime have engaged the earnest attention of philo-

sophers, scientists and statesmen alike, and never with a more deep

and wide interest than today.

That our concern with this intractable problem must still be so

great is perhaps a sad comment on the limitations of human thought

and effort. But at least in selecting for study the question of recidivism

you are going to the heart of the matter. For the central problem of

any penal system is without doubt that of the persistent offender,

the man who resists all efforts directed towards his social rehabilita-

tion, and is undeterred by repeated punishment.

It may be that in selecting “‘recidivism” as the descriptive title for

your studies you had in mind a wider range than the problem of the

persistent offender, or habitual criminal. For the term recidivism, in

this country at least, is not a term of art. It has no precise significance

in penal practice, and is to be found in no statute or statutory

33

CC—C

regulation. I note that one of your sections is to concern itself with

the definition of the term, so it may be that we here are not alone

in our vagueness. But even if we give to recidivism its simplest mean-

ing, that of relapse into crime, it would still repay the most careful

study. The statistics of the penal system of this country show that,

broadly speaking, some three-quarters of those who come to prison

for the first time do not come back. But it is among those who do

receive a second sentence, however few they may be in proportion

to the whole, that the persistent offenders of the future will be found.

Is it not then precisely here, at this first step in recidivism, that our

effort should be concentrated? And when I speak of effort, I think

not only of treatment but of social research.

I am, therefore, particularly glad to note that two of your sections

will concern themselves with the causes and prognosis of recidivism.

For though treatment is our purpose, we shall not arrive at the most

effective forms of treatment without much more light than we have

at present on diagnosis.

Perhaps at this stage I should explain my concern with these

questions, since the functions of the Secretary of State for the Home

Department may not be known to all of you. In this country we

have no Ministry of Justice, but the Home Secretary, as the Secretary

of State is commonly called, has various and extensive responsibili-

ties connected with the administration of justice. He is also the

Minister on whom rests the primary responsibility for ensuring ths

maintenance of the Queen’s Peace. While this ancient historical

conception means something more than the mere prevention of

crime and disorder, it does in practice mean that the Home Secretary

must concern himself with all aspects of the prevention of crime and

the treatment of offenders. Thus his responsibilities include not only

police administration, but the administration of all forms of punish-

ment or treatment which are prescribed by statute for offences

against the criminal law. These include the probation system, the

schools for juvenile delinquents, and the various penal institutions

which are administered by a sub-department of the Home Office

known as the Prison Commission. I shall, therefore, take a special

and personal interest in the work of your Congress.

I hope that in the course of that work you will find some interest

in the very carefully devised and comprehensive system for dealing

with persistent offenders set up in this country by the Criminal

Justice Act, 1948. This is now well established, though in the detail

of its methods it is constantly developing, and no doubt those

responsible for its administration will have much to learn from your

proceedings.

34

My officials will be at your disposal for any help they can give

you, and those of you who wish to visit our institutions to see for

yourselves will be made very welcome.

Once again I offer you a most cordial welcome. I am grateful to

your distinguished President, Dr. Denis Carroll, for bringing you to

London and for inviting me to meet you. And I wish you well in

your most valuable work.

35

' AI:)I‘)(R’E;SS

by

| PkOFESSOR M LOPI;:Z.'-RE'Y

Representative of the Secretary-General

of the United Nations

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, it is, for me, a privilege

to participate, as representative of the Secretary-General of the

United Nations, in the Third International Congress on Criminology

organised by the International Society of Criminology. As a non-

governmental organisation which has consultative status with the

United Nations, the International Society of Criminology is playing

an important part in the prevention of crime and the treatment of

offenders. Among other aspects of its activity I wish to refer, here,

to its valuable publications, the Congresses it organises and, more

especially, its increasing co-operation with the Secretariat of the

United Nations.

The present Congress will discuss a subject which is part of the

prevention of crime as well as of the treatment of offenders, namely

the problem of recidivism. In spite of the progress made by modern

Criminal Law and Penology, recidivism still remains, in many

countries, either a purely legal concept based on the number of

previous condemnations or a term referring in a rather general way

to a socially dangerous kind of behaviour. It is still believed that

habitual offenders are people much experienced in crime and that

the legal character of their offences should determine the increasing

severity of the penalties imposed. The question arises whether such

a legal point of view is fully justified not only in the light of modern

criminology but also with respect to a better protection of society.

Another question that should, perhaps, be discussed is the practice

of treating all habitual offenders as dangerous persons. The regular

practice of crime does not necessarily make all habitual offenders

more dangerous than certain primary offenders. Actually, the latter

may occasionally be more dangerous than certain recidivists. The

conclusion may be that public danger is not necessarily an exclusive

characteristic of habitual offenders.

Another question is to what extent habitual criminality may be

considered as something inherent in a particular kind of mental

36

constitution, or as something resulting from environmental circum-

stances, or as being due to the interaction of both these factors

In evaluating recidivism, the question whether or not criminal

offences committed in youth: should be taken into account seems to

deserve particular attention. For those supporting the thesis that

juvenile offenders are not real offenders and even that their criminal

records should be destroyed, or should not be kept and put at the

disposal of the competent authorities at a later stage, the answer

seems to be in the negative. For those, however, who think it neces-

sary to know as.much as possible about the offender in order to

evaluate his personality, it seems rather difficult to justify a discon-

tinuity between the Juvemle and adult crlmmal career of the very

same person.

To what extent can recidivism be con81dered as a criminological

entity to which some specific characteristics can be assigned? Is

recidivism a problem which can be solved only with adequate indi-

vidual treatment or should it, at least, be considered as an aspect of

any policy directed towards the prevention of crime? What should

be the relationship between such general preventive activity and that

concerned with individual treatment?

These and other similar questions will very probably be discussed

by you. I wish to take this opportunity of saying that the problem

of recidivism is particularly important to the 'United Nations

Secretariat, among othér reasons because the Economic and Social

Council, at its last session in July-August 1955, when approving the

Programme of Work a351gned to the Secretariat, gave high priority

to the project concerning “Treatment of Types of Offenders against

whom Society needs particular protection”. In principle, this project

will take account of habitual, sexual and abnormal offenders. I say

in principle’” because, as is very well known, a distinction cannot

always be made between these three groups of offenders

In any case I am sure that the discussions and conclusions of this

Congress will provide valuable information for the work of the

United Nations Secretariat. As you can see, your Congress is, in

itself,”a form of co-operation with the United Natlons and I wish

to thank you for it.

Before concluding, I would like, on behalf of the Secretary-

General of the United Nations, to express his best wishes for the

success of the Tthd Internatlonal Congress on Crlmmology

37

ADDRESS

by

DR. DENIS CARROLL

President, International Society for Criminology

President, Third Congress on Criminology

It is with great pleasure and satisfaction that I and the British

Organising Committee welcome you to the Third International

Congress on Criminology. This Congress is arranged on behalf of

the International Society for Criminology, whose quinquennial

congress it is.

You will be interested to hear that the Congress has more than

400 members drawn from 44 countries; and contains a most satis-

fying representation of informed world opinion. It also presents an

equally satisfying cross-section of the many sciences, disciplines and

techniques involved in the active pursuit of criminology.

It is not without interest to note that, so far as I know, this is the

first international congress on criminology of this type to be held by

a private international scientific society in this country.

As will be quite apparent to those of you who have already had

time to read the programme, this is a working congress.

So many have asked me to describe the details of organisation of

this Congress that I shall take the opportunity on this occasion to

outline the main plan of procedure.

The business of each of the five sections of the Congress will be

under the direction of a committee consisting of: the Chairman of

the section, its Vice-Chairman, the two General Rapporteurs of the

given section and two section secretaries. It is not intended for one

moment to hamper in any way the freest scientific discussion in the

meetings of the sections; but it is our hope that this structure will

enable the appropriate officers of each section to keep some adequate,

though not too long, account of the progress that is made in their

section.

To prepare a full summary of debates would be an over-arduous

task to carry out within the time limits of a week’s congress. But it

should be possible to record the main trends of discussion; and, in

particular, to note very briefly, the chief points of agreement and

disagreement. In addition we hope that some indications will appear,

38

and be duly recorded, of desirable lines for future research and

reform. I have no doubt that in the debates of so distinguished a

group as this some individual points of view will emerge which,

whether they fit into the general conclusions of one of the sections

or not, will compel mention when we come together on Thursday

and Saturday of this week to discuss the work of the sections in

plenary session. On Thursday morning the General Rapporteurs

will give a brief account of how things are going in the sections, and

on Saturday morning each section Chairman will present a brief

account of the work and results accomplished.

Our warmest thanks are due to those who have consented to act

as officials in various capacities for theirs is a most important task.

- Although the main topic of this Congress is recidivism, it has been

found possible to gratify the general wish to include a number of

original lectures and research communications on a wide variety of

criminological topics.

It was not the intention of those who planned this Congress that

we should endeavour to produce formal resolutions. Such an aim is

seldom appropriate to a scientific congress; and, frequently, it is not

even possible. Nevertheless, resolutions are not banned, for it may

well be that one or more of the sections will find that they have

arrived at a consensus of opinion which might be put forward as a

resolution with profit to our science.

Quite naturally, we are concerned in this Congress both with

recidivism and recidivists. That is to say, we are concerned not

merely with those who have been convicted or imprisoned more

than once. We are concerned with the whole phenomenon presented

by those individuals who show a tendency to relapse into crime. In

other words we are concerned with a wider field than that presented

by officially recorded criminality. We are, in effect, concerned with

the criminal habitus—the tendency that some human beings show

of persisting in crime, whether their crimes be detected or not. To be

sure, there may be a difference between the psychology of the repeti-

tive criminal who happens never to have been caught, and that of

the individual who continues to commit crimes despite having been

caught and punished or otherwise treated. We do not yet know much

about what that difference is. This point is not merely an academic

one, for our preventive programmes must endeavour to take into

account the very real need to lessen the total amount of crime, which

includes the number of crimes that are never brought to light as

well as those that are reported but whose perpetrators are never dis-

covered and those where the criminal is discovered and properly

dealt with.

39

Real progress has been made in this direction. The spectacular

advance in prediction studies illustrates our progress particularly

well. The continuing refinement and skill of child guidance clinics

represents another contribution to our progress in solving this

problem.

This aspect of the problem has long been apparent to the mental

scientist, because in his ordinary clinical work he is called upon,

not only to deal with the detected criminal, but also to deal with a

wide variety of potentially delinquent, and predelinquent children

as well as adults. Moreover he is frequently confronted with persons

many of whose crimes have never been detected, and therefore

probably knows more accurately than anyone else, the number of

crimes—detected .and undetected—that those whom he examines

have committed.

He has found that this knowledge is of the greatest value when

prescribing treatment; and also when he is faced with the need to

forecast the likelihood-of the offender committing another crime. It

also has a marked bearing on the probable response to treatment on

the part of the delinquent, whether that treatment be psychiatric,

social, penal or what else.

By way of example I may mention homosexual offenders. It is a

matter of almost general agreement—and it is one of the very few

things on which there is agreement about sex offenders—that the

response to treatment and the likelihood of a successful outcome of

psychiatric treatment is considerably influenced by the extent of the

history of their delinquency. By the history of delinquency I have in

mind both sexual and non-sexual characteristics of their history

The psychiatrist and the psychologist both in practice and theory

consider that the whole life record of criminal attitudes and behaviour

is of great importance. Yet it must be acknowledged as true that we

do not know anything like enough about the significance of all the

facts we are able to discover for prognosis and treatment. One of

the best English studies has shown that quite a surprisingly high

proportion of adult recidivists have no known juvenile criminal

record. Indeed only twenty-nine per cent had records of convictions

as juveniles. Similarly, many juvenile recidivists do not apparently

develop into adult recidivists. No one has solved as yet the problem

of complete records of the kind I have in mind. We really do not

know, for certain, whether the unofficial records of these individuals

would show the same story as their official records.

I know of .nothing in recent criminological work which would

suggest that modern criminology has out-moded the theory of

multiple causation. Many recent publications and, particularly, pre-

40

S

W

w

:

£

]

.

-

fm

1

S

P e

B e

Y

tll.\h*

e SRR

:

¥ 3

3%

F

»

o

i

i

w

]

i

‘M

Bod

A M

m

Eel

Wm

W

-

e

f

14

3

¥

= xh

&

-

4

:

i

)

K

R

%

5 w

SRS

o

e b i e e A ot e

s ik At

T g S

L

%

i

y

e

DO

s

o

-y

L

m

m

-

L B

%

s

%

P

m«

#

e

y

g

ki

%

’

G

o

i

«%

m

m

w

i >4

m

W

¢

=q#

i

22

. o

b

R

A

¥

C

%,

iy

i

\\‘

G 4

-

b

‘i

=

i X

w

%

v

»

.....

.

)

) %

Ry

5

5

%

5

P

.

oasiey W

e

.....

e

| =

%

goELE

L

HH |

m

P

HHA

HH

g

7

W&

11

;

A

H

e A

M‘

L 2 1

e 4

WM_

il

%

o

diction studies, however, have made use of criminal characteristics

rather than causal factors—which are described in researches dealing

with multiple causation. In other words, in prediction we are rely-

ing, as in many other modern studies, on the kind of facts about a

criminal’s career and antecedents that can be observed fairly easily

and reliably, provided that the observer has sufficient skill and is

free from personal bias. In forecasting the probability of the future

criminality of an individual, or in forecasting his likely response to

a given method of treatment, we are tending more and more to rely

on those accurately observable facts which have been statistically

demonstrated to be of significance for this purpose. Correspondingly

we are tending to depend less and less upon the variety of causal

factors which we might assume to be at work in him. Nor do we

rely so much on the significance of the psychological structure that

can be deduced from the observed behaviour and characteristics of

a given transgressor. In practical work this is all to the good, for

such deductions are usually under the considerable influence of the

theoretical bias of the observer.

It is not surprising therefore that there is a

ﬁlérked tendency to

consider criminal characteristics to be of greater importance than

causal factors. As far as prediction is concerned, at the state of our

knowledge today the known characteristics of the individual are

certainly of more value than known causal factors. This does not

hold true in all the field of our endeavour. When we do research

into causes our attitude becomes inevitably reversed.

It seems that in modern clinical work the psychiatrist and psycho-

logist find it occasionally possible to combine the use of prediction

tables and clinical methods of prognosis. It is in this way that we

attempt, albeit with only partial success for the time being, to gain

greater certainty as to whether the probability of future criminality

inferred from the use of prediction tables is, in fact, likely to be

realised in the future career of a given individual. To the clinician,

and especially to the clinician interested in therapy (whether he be

a penologist, a social worker, or a mental scientist), the implication

from the use of prediction tables that an individual offender has a

high probability of a recidivist career has to be regarded as a

therapeutic challenge. That is to say, the higher the probability of

future criminality the greater must be the therapeutic effort and skill

we endeavour to bring to bear on the treatment of the delinquent in

question. To my mind this is the proper way to regard this matter.

It is true that at present our therapeutic methods are not such as to

give us sufficient confidence in meeting such a challenge.

The dramatic results that have been achieved by prediction studies

41

have momentarily overshadowed other approaches to the study of

prognosis. Similarly, the great advance that has taken place in the

application of statistical mathematics to criminological research has

partially eclipsed the value of qualitative research. But I think it is

still necessary to emphasise that, in the last resort, it is the qualitative

method that will reveal the true meaning of the probabilities which

the statistician reveals. Indeed the clinician finds it valuable to use

a qualitative approach to the problem of prognosis. He finds many

valuable indications by the adequate application of the comprehen-

sive methods of medical, social, and psychological examination

described in the proceedings of the Brussels Seminar held on that

topic in 1951. Similarly the qualitative and clinical approaches con-

tinue to yield valuable research data into the causal factors and

treatment.

Psychoanalytic research into criminal behaviour is superlatively

qualitative. For many years the views of this school have been in-

fluenced by our increasing knowledge of Ego development in the

earliest years of life. From the psychoanalytic point of view I think

it-is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that much recidivism is

the result of faulty development of the ego. Emotional deprivation

arising from the separation of a young child from its mother is one

cause of this. None the less, mother-child separation is not a uni-

versal cause of recidivism or of criminality in general. It seems that

many of the children who are deprived in this way do not become

criminal. Certainly this kind of emotional deprivation is important

in the causation of crime. What is equally important, in my view, is

that it is more frequently a cause of emotional maladjustment than

it is of criminal behaviour.

The biologist and the psychoanalyst are coming closer together.

Some of these faults in ego development discovered by the psycho-

analyst seem to me to imply the presence of a constitutional factor—

that is to say, the presence of a biological factor. It is difficult to

understand how some of these ego faults could persist otherwise.

We will do well to recall that Freud always postulated a constitu-

tional causal factor as well as an environmental one.

It is not to be overlooked that the study of brain function too is

promising. The use of the electro-encephalogram seems to point to

its becoming a method of predicting that certain types of individual

are more than usually prone to commit violent offences. However,

most potential offenders cannot be detected by this means. I have

also been impressed by the beneficial results of removal of the

temporal lobe; though offenders suitable for this method of treat-

ment must be rare. It would be quite erroneous to think that brain

42

surgery is likely to become a method of choice in the treatment of

criminality in general. Even the electro-encephalogram itself is

proving to be a somewhat confusing counsellor. Some recent

studies have made it seem that some types of psychopath may be

less at risk if theit electro-encephalogram is abnormal than if it is

normal.

Endocrinology

i‘hans failed to fulfil its early promise in elucidating

criminal personality. But it has given a real stimulus to treatment.

In: particular the treatment of sex offenders by oestrogens. In what

way the successful treatment of some types of recidivists and chronic

sex offenders by castration is allied to this is not clear. There have

also been most-encouraging results from the use of some of the male

hormones in the treatment of inadequate adolescents. For all these

individuals the hormone treatment should be part of a comprehen-

sive scheme of treatment involving an all-round attack on all the

known causal factors.

- It-~is indeed, in the forefront of modern treatment to treat the

criminal by an all-round attack on all the known causal factors by

all necessary biological, psychological and social methods. More-

over; after-care and follow-up study have become essential parts of

treatment. The tendency is to regard discharge from prison as a

stage in treatment and not as its termination.

Equally marked is the continued advance o

f ambulant treatmént.

We now find more and more countries extending, or considering

extending, their methods to include the adequate examination and

treatment of the offender while leaving him at liberty in the com-

munity.

I would like to emphasise here that nowadays the term “‘treat-

ment” includes all the therapeutic or reformative influences that

can be deliberately brought to bear upon the offender. No longer is

it enough to think of the term as implying medical, or psychological,

or social, or penal, treatment alone. It automatically implies the

application of an appropriate battery of therapeutic (or reformative)

methods.

Group therapy—that is, the treatment of persons in groups instead

of individually—is now well established. It is used more and more

in prisons and in clinics in the treatment of offenders of all ages.

The excellent results have yet to be adequately tested by time.

Whether those results are lasting or not, there is no doubt about the

value of this method to the criminologist. It is here to stay.

Group therapy is superficial compared with individual psycho-

logical treatment, yet it is often successful where individual treat-

ment fails.

Research into the tensions between the individual

43

members of a group and into the tensions between groups of people

have helped us to understand why this is so.

These researches have led to new methods in the therapy of

psychopaths. They have also given insight into the extremely diffi-

cult problems of morale in prisoners and prison staff. I cannot help

feeling that, in time, they will also help to solve some of the vexatious

problems of short-term prisons. The short-term sentence is so fre-

quently unsatisfactory that it must rank high on any list of necessary

researches. Such research would, surely, result in reform; but not in

the abolition of the short sentence.

It is a fitting moment to recall that the trend of modern penology

is towards leniency, liberty and prolonged after-care. Inevitably

mistakes must occur and avoidable crimes be committed. But such

incidents are comparatively few. What is more, they are fewer than

they would be in a harsher system. But it is not surprising that public

anxiety is aroused from time to time. It is well to have a wise

administration that is also capable, when necessary, of withstanding

the pressure of such anxiety. Public over-anxiety is the father of

excessive preventive action. The remedy for public anxiety is that

the public be well informed. There is a need for public education

and ever more education in our science and in our practice. Yet we

must be ever mindful of the need for social security. We must keep

in mind too the need to respect human rights.

Indeed in all these matters affecting our treatment of antisocial

persons we must ensure that our efforts to reform the offender do

not offend against humanity. Nor must zeal for reform lead us to

outrage our sense of justice.

S

e

Reae

o

a5

i

22

s

2

S

s

o

5

i

2

2

2%

2

o

s

2

o

5

5

Towlx foude

M. JEAN PINATEL, General Secretary, International Society foi

Criminology

ADDRES’S

by

M. ‘J EAN PINATEL

Secretary-General, International Society for Criminology

Monsieur le Président, Mesdames, Messieurs, Les grandes mani-

festations internationales de la Criminologie ont été pendant long-

temps limitées a4 I’Europe continentale. C’est ainsi, qu’avant la

guerre de 1914, les Congrés Internationaux d’Anthropologie

Criminelle tinrent leurs assises & Rome, Paris, Bruxelles, Genéve,

Amsterdam, Turin, Cologne. Le VIlléme Congrés International

d’Anthropologie Criminelle devait avoir lieu en 1915 a Budapest,

mais 1l est superflu de préciser que les hostilités empéchérent sa

réunion. Elles eurent aussi pour effet de disperser les promoteurs du

mouvement criminologique. Aprés la guerre, la grande tradition des

Congreés d’Anthropologie Criminelle ne fut pas reprise. Il n’existait

pas, en effet, d’organisme international susceptible de promouvoir

d’autres manifestations de ce genre. Il fallut donc attendre 1934

pour que, sur Pinitiative de M. Benigno di Tullio, les bases de cette

organisation internationale puissent étre jetées. La naissance de la

Société Internationale de Criminologie fut consacrée par le ler

Congres International de Criminologie, qui eut lieu 3 Rome du

3 au 8 octobre 1938.

Malheureusement, une fois encore la guerre risqua de réduire a

néant les efforts entrepris. Ils ne furent pas totalement annihilés

grace a nos collegues latino-américains. Ils réussirent 4 sauvegarder

la vitalité et & maintenir le dynamisme de la criminologie de 1938

a 1949 en organisant de brillants Congrés Régionaux a Buenos

Aires, Santiago, Rio de Janeiro, Mexico. C’est en 1947 3 Rio de

Janeiro que M. Benigno di Tullio lanca I'idée d’un Institut Inter-

national de Criminologie et que M. Leonidio Ribeiro fit admettre

qu’un IIéme Congrés International de Criminologie devait étre

organisé a Paris.

Ce Ileme Congreés International devait s’ouvrir trois ans plus

tard, en 1950, au Palais de La Sorbonne. 1l fut présidé par le

regretté maitre H. Donnedieu de Vabres, assisté par le R. P. Piprot

d’Alleaume. 11 eut un retentissement considérable et c’est son succes

45

qui a permis A la criminologie de parfaire son organisation inter-

nationale.

La constitution de la criminologie en science autonome, distincte

a la fois du droit pénal et des sciences fondamentales qu’elle utilise,

ne manqua pas de provoquer des réactions curieuses. Dans certains

pays, on vit des autorités s’efforcer vainement d’annexer la crimino-

logie au droit pénal ou a4 la médecine légale. D’une manicre générale,

I’argument fut mis en avant que le développement de la criminologie

était susceptible de porter atteinte aux garanties de la liberté indi-

viduelle par l'intégration dans la procédure pénale de I’examen

médico-psychologique et social.

Je suis heureux que le IIléme Congrés International de Crimino-

logie débute aujourd’hui & Londres, non seulement parce que se

trouve ainsi affirmée et sanctionnée 1’expansion géographique de

notre discipline, mais aussi parce que nous voici dans la patrie de

I’habeas corpus et qu’il n’est pas de lieu plus propice pour déclarer

qu’il n’y a pas et ne saurait y avoir d’opposition entre criminologie

et liberté individuelle. Il faut avoir, en effet, le courage de dire que

ce n’est pas en maintenant la permanence de l'ignorance que la

liberté individuelle peut étre sauvegardée.

Nous voici maintenant 3 pied d’ceuvre, préts a faire subir a la

méthodologie dégagée a Paris, I’épreuve des faits, a travers ’étude

des grands problémes du récidivisme. Ce résultat a été atteint grace

aux efforts des membres du Comité d’Organisation britannique,

dont je m’honore d’étre un membre coopté. Je remercie, au nom du

Conseil de Direction et de la Commission Scientifique de la Société

Internationale de Criminologie, tous ceux qui se sont joints 3 M.

Denis Carroll, Président de notre institution et & M. Hermann

Mannheim, notre délégué national en Grande-Bretagne et leur ont

apporté le secours de leur expérience ou le patronage de leur nom.

Je les félicite de la ténacité et du courage dont ils ont fait preuve.

Ils ont, en partageant la foi de leur Président, rendu un estimable

service 4 la criminologie, car c’est grace a eux que nous pourrons

dans les jours qui vont suivre confronter les points de vue les plus

divers et spécialement ceux de la criminologie continentale, de la

criminologie latino-américaine et de la criminologie anglo-saxone.

Dans sa phase continentale et latino-américaine, la criminologie

apparait étroitement liée aux premicres découvertes de I’Ecole

Italienne. Il est dangereux certes d’utiliser des formules générales

dans leur simplification exagérée. Mais, lorsqu’on dit que la crimino-

logie continentale est d’orientation essentiellement biologique, on

exprime une vue d’ensemble qui, dans la perspective des tendances

dominantes, est relativement exacte. Les adversaires continentaux

46

de cette orientation biologique tels que Tarde ou Bonger dans le

passé, n’ont pu, en effet, développer leurs oppositions et leurs

critiques que parce que préexistait ’cuvre italienne de Lombroso,

de Ferri, de Garofalo, dont le continuateur contemporain, le maitre

F. Grispigni, vient de nous étre enlevé d’une fagon inattendue et

brutale. C’est avec une intense émotion et une peine profonde que

j’évoque sa mémoire au moment ol la criminologie issue de I’Ecole

Italienne s’infléchit vers des horizons nouveaux.

Ces horizons sont nouveaux, car la criminologie britannique,

illustrée par Maudsley, Goring, Sir Cyril Burt, s’est développée tres

largement en marge de la criminologie continentale. A I’heure

actuelle, 'Institut pour le traitement scientifique de la délinquance

groupe une pléiade de savants et de praticiens dont I'inspiration est

treés largement psychologique, voire psychanalytique. Ce ne sera pas

un des moindres intéréts de ce Congreés que de permettre, a propos

du théme du récidivisme, la confrontation des points de vue bio-

logique et psychanalytique. Bien plus, les affinités de langue qui

unissent la Grande Bretagne et les Etats-Unis d’Amérique doit faci-

liter également ’expression de la criminologie nord-américaine aussi

bien dans son aspect médico-psychologique issu de I’ceuvre de W.

Healy que, dans celui qui, depuis Sutherland, parait largement

tributaire de la sociologie et de la socio-psychologie. C’est dire que

notre Congres, s’efforce de confronter, de coordonner, d’har-

moniser les approches biologique, psychologique et sociologique

dans ’ambiance de liberté dont les réunions véritablement scienti-

fiques gardent le privilége.

La rencontre de la criminologie continentale, de la criminologie

latino-américaine et de la criminologie anglo-saxone sera d’autant

plus passionnante qu’elle débordera inévitablement le cadre de la

science pure pour s’étendre aux applications pratiques. Dans ce

pays — ou depuis John Howard et Elizabeth Fry, les problémes

pénaux et pénitentiaires suscitent tant d’intérét, ou la Ligue Howard

grace a Mlle Margery Fry et 4 Monsieur H. J. Klare, milite active-

ment pour la réforme pénale — il aurait été inconcevable que le

théme du récidivisme soit seulement évoqué sur le terrain des facteurs

et processus criminogenes et que soit négligée I’étude des expériences

concretes qui précédent ou prolongent I’élaboration scientifique. Le

Criminal Justice Act.de 1948 a dans cet ordre d’idées, complété la

preventive detention par le corrective training et il sera utile de

connaitre les résultats de ce nouveau régime a I’égard des délinquants

persistants, comme il sera opportun de creuser les possibilités du

systeme de probation et d’éducation Borstal & I’égard d’autres réci-

divistes. Il est hors de doute que nous prendrons de la sorte mieux

47

conscience de la nécessité de la criminologie clinique qui, utilisant

les méthodes biologique, psychologique et sociologique dans un

travail d’observation effectué en équipe, s’efforce d’aboutlr dans

chaque cas individuel, & un diagnostic, & un pronostic, a

un traite-

ment et & un reclassement social. C’est la systématisation et I’élabora-

tion statistique des connaissances dégagées lors de 1’étude clinique

des récidivistes qui ont permis d’aboutir aux résultats condensés dans

les remarquables rapports généraux qui seront présentés. Il est

permis d’affirmer que les apports de la méthode clinique dans I’étude

du récidivisme sont d’ores et déja considérables.

Je voudrais rendre ici un solonnel hommage aux chercheurs de

tous les pays du monde qui, avec trop souvent des moyens de fortune

quelquefois, méme, dans ’improvisation, ont scruté et dénombré les

facteurs et les processus du récidivisme

Certes, je sais que toute science a ses débuts, doit sans aide, par

la recherche personnelle et désintéressée, prouver son utilité et son

efficacité. Mais vous estimerez sans doute, avec moi, que la période

heronque de la criminologie est dépassée. On est en droit de dire

qu’avec une organisation rationnelle et des instruments adéquats,

des résultats bien plus substantiels auraient été atteints. Ce ne sont

pas les hommes et les méthodes qui font défaut, mais sous réserve

d’heureuses exceptions, ce sont les moyens matériels qui manquent

La présence & ce Congrés des représentants qualifiés des grandes

organisations internationales qui honorent notre Société, du statut

consultatif, m’incite a

proclamer que ’on ne peut plus aujourd’hui

fermer les yeux volontairement devant les acquisitions et les virtu-

alités scientifiques de la criminologie, que la pénurie de nos moyens

de recherches n’a plus de raison d’étre

Je suis toutefois heureux de constater que, dans nos temps effer-

vescents, ol nait I’ére atomique, ou I’on songe aux voyages inter-

planétaires, ou les problémes militaires angoissent le monde, les

dirigeants internationaux et nationaux peuvent faire autre chose que

d’accorder un regard distrait 2 ces savants et a ces praticiens qui

s’intéressent aux scories produites par I'immense machine qu’est

notre société moderne. Il faut qu’ils sachent que si nous nous effor-

cons, avec des moyens ridiculement faibles, de découvrir les chemins

de la délinquance et du récidivisme, c’est que nous croyons de la

sorte contribuer

une promotion de 'homme et que c’est 1a notre

grandeur

Mais ce qu’il convient aussi de dire, c’est que dans le systeme

pénal et pénitentiaire traditionnel, le colit du récidivisme est énorme

pour la raison bien simple, que non seulement on ne fait rien pour

prévenir le phénoméne, mais que le systéme lui-méme, 4 bien des

48

égards, I’alimente et le développe. Des réformes s’'imposent et par

une heureuse coincidence le progrés des institutions va de pair avec

la rentabilit¢é économique.

Je ne doute pas que cette vérité qui, 3 mes yeux, s’impose avec la

force de I’évidence ne manquera pas d’étre comprise par ceux qui se

sont attribués la tache de faire évoluer dans la voie du perfectionne-

ment les services traditionnels de défense sociale.

Je forme donc des veeux pour que les représentants des organisa-

tions internationales, les délégués des Gouvernements les savants,

les praticiens, retirent de nos austéres débats, la conviction que la

criminologie est & un tournant de son histoire. Pour peu que, — sui-

vant ’exemple de I’Unesco, des gouvernements et institutions qui

ont permis nos premiers pas — pour peu qu’on nous aide, sans

arriere-pensées, notre science progressera rapidement, permettant

sur le plan de la politique criminelle des renouvellements profonds.

La réalisation effective du grand Institut International de Crimino-

logie, dont le principe a été admis en 1950 & Paris sera le levain qui

développera, stimulera, dotera d’efficacité I’effort de noschercheurs.

J’en ai terminé. Au nom de la Société Internationale de Crimino-

logie, j’ai le privilege de souhaiter la bienvenue a tous les Con-

gressistes. Je dis bonne chance au IIIéme Congrés International de

Criminologie.

49

CC-D

SECTION 1

DEFINITIONS OF RECIDIVISM

by Norval Morris

A scientific criminology presupposes the development of precise

technical definitions for its leading concepts. The formulation of

these terms of art cannot, in the first place, be a process of creation

but must be rather the careful analysis of current usage leading to

widespread tacit agreement to use a term in a precise sense. Only in

this fashion can we build up the necessary link between the word

and the concept, the term and its referent. For purposes of crimino-

logy, words cannot be made as things are made—extensive usage

must precede any attempt at crystallisation by means of agreed defi-

nition. Lewis Carroll’s hints on semantics cannot greatly help us.!

~ The term recidivism urgently requires definition. The phenomenon

of recidivism is of great significance for the criminologist, presenting

an essential challenge to our penal systems and constituting a yard-

stick, frequently used, to measure the success of our correctional

processes. Indeed, almost every piece of criminological research can

be regarded as studying or presenting information about recidivism.

Despite its significance, the term is used in a bewildering variety of

senses. Yet it cannot be discarded—it stands for a notionally isolated,

theoretically necessary, criminological concept for which there is no

alternative term readily available.

The Organising Committee of this Congress apparently require

a preliminary nominal definition of recidivism, for they give prece-

dence to the topic of definition. It might equally well be placed last.

Our entire knowledge, such as it is, of recidivists would then be

poured into our ultimate real definition. Some rough nominal defini-

tion would even then be a necessary preliminary to our discussions

for we must, to an extent, delimit the area of human conduct we

propose to discuss. Otherwise, whatever we may think we are arguing

1*When | use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, it

means just what 1 choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

“The question is,”” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many

different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, ‘“which is to be master—that’s all.”

(Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass, chap. vi.)

50

about, we are likely to be arguing about definitions. At the end we

may have changed our ideas on the conceptual content of recidivism

and thus have progressed towards a real definition of this term.

We are dealing then, in the first part of this section, with a nominal

and not a real definition. In phrasing this definition, individual

prejudices should, so far as possible, be exorcised—for we come to-

gether from different countries, with different legal systems and vary-

ing approaches to criminology, to discuss a question whose limits are

clear enough when we consider it in the setting of the legal and penal

systems with which we individually are most familiar but less clear

when it is projected on to the international plane. Our nominal defi-

nition must therefore neither inhibit discussion nor confine it too

closely, nor yet must it be a mere paraphrase of the lowest common

denominator of elements in our respective definitions of reci-

divism.

The thirteen national reports! which have guided me in preparing

this report revealed a surprising similarity of approach. In this

general report 1 have relied mainly on these national reports for the

examples quoted and have gained immeasurably from them, notably

in their demonstration of the ways in which various legal and penal

systems make use of the idea of recidivism; but I have necessarily

gone beyond the national reports in discussing definitions possibly

capable of receiving international currency. In particular, I am

responsible for the following somewhat contentious propositions on

which this general report is based:

11t is expected of a general report that it looks politely upon the national

reports on which it is based; courtesy demands expressed approval of these

reports. In this instance, however, this expectation hinders me from adequately

expressing my view of the remarkably high quality of the reports I received. It

seemed presumptuous to try to summarise the information they contained—they

merited your attention in their amplitude, and in their authors’ words.

The thirteen reports on this topic available to me were prepared by:

(1) Rev. Father Julien Beausoleil (Canada);

(2) Professor F. M. van Bemmelen (Netherlands);

(3) Professor Nils Christie (Norway);

(4) Dr. Julio Morales Coello and Dr. Armando Raggi (Cuba);

(5) Dr. P. J. Coffrie (Netherlands);

(6) Dr. A. Pulat Goziibityiik (Turkey);

(7) Mr. T. S. Lodge (England and Wales);

(8) Mr. L. C. J. Nott (New South Wales, Australia);

(9) Colonel J. Scanlon (Tasmania, Australia);

(10) Professor Thorsten Sellin (United States of America);

(11) Professor H. J. Venter (Union of South Africa);

(12) Dr. M. B. Van de Werk (Netherlands);

(13) Professor von Weber (Germany).

51

that it is both impossible to achieve and unwise to seek a single

definition of recidivism;

that we must define recidivism differently for the purposes of at

least three different aspects of the application of the criminal

law;

that recidivism has a different connotation to the lawyer, the

penal administrator and the criminologist, when considered

from the viewpoint of their own disciplines;

and that though there are elements in common in these three

types of definition of recidivism they are too few to form the

foundation of any useful single definition.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines recidivism as ‘“‘the habit of

relapsing into crime” and a recidivist as “one who habitually relapses

into crime”. How, then, does it define “relapse”? As “a falling back

into error, heresy or wrongdoing—the fact of falling back again into

illness after a partial recovery—to fall again into heresy after recanta-

tion”.! The dictionary definition thus involves an idea of temporary

cure or amelioration, which seems unreal for our purposes. Both in

popular and technical usage the definition of recidivism as applied

to crime requires only previous conviction of crime (and possibly

punishment) and not necessarily any hint of temporary cure befors

a subsequent commission of crime.?

It is submitted that, guided by current usages to which dictionary

definitions must bow, there are three distinct though overlapping defi-

nitions of ‘‘recidivism”—as a penal term, as a legal term and as a

criminological term. The third is likely to concern us most at this

Congress, but it can best be understood in the light of the first two.

For all three the problem is the same; the solutions vary. Setting up

a hypothetical prototype criminal career, running from first offence(s)

through first conviction, first punishment, subsequent offence(s), to

second and subsequent convictions and punishments (distinguishing

suspended sentences and probation from imprisonment, reformatory

1 Larousse defines “récidive” as “‘action de commettre de nouveau un délit, un

crime . . . réapparition d’une maladie” and “récidiviste” as *“‘une personne qui

tombe dans la récidive, dans le méme délit, le méme crime pour lequel elle a

déja été condamnée.”

? Consideration of the etymology of the term is of no great assistance. It is

derived from the mediaeval Latin ‘‘recidivare’’, from the Latin “‘recidivus’’, from

recidere, from cadere—to fall. Hence, falling again.

52

sentences and “mesures de sfireté”), there is a continuum of criminal

maturation and a change in the approach of the penal administrator,

the lawyer, and the criminologists to the problems of punishment.

Each will draw a line through this continuum at which they hold

that they then and thereafter face the problem of a recidivist—some-

times all three will agree as to where the line should be drawn; more

often they will disagree, because they draw it for different purposes.

PENAL DEFINITION

A traditional and widespread prison classification of prisoners is

into ‘““first-timers” and “‘recidivists”, “first-timers” generally being

accorded ameliorated conditions and receiving more positive re-

habilitative training. The traditional English classification of

prisoners into *stars” (first-timers) and “ordinaries” is a leading

example. The national reports and other published information on

prison administration in many countries indicate that this type of

classification is widespread. It is more rigidly applied in some

countries than in others, some finding it merely one factor in the

larger question of developing rational systems of classification of

prisoners; but most at least use it as one test.

It is submitted that this is what the penal administrator and the

warder think of when the term recidivist is used—one who being in

prison has been there before, in both cases convicted of a criminal

offence.}

For example:

Union of South Africa, Prison Regulation No. 417, as amended,

defines “recidivist” as “any person who, at any time having

served a sentence of imprisonment of one month or more in

a prison or gaol, or any period on an order of detention in a

reformatory or farm colony, is thereafter sentenced to such

imprisonment . . . in respect of an offence committed subse-

quent to the date of the first mentioned sentence, but does not

include any person as so defined who has not been convicted

19

1 See, for example, Donald Clemmer, The Prison Community, Boston, U.S.A,°

» page 57; «

practical prison officials generally take the position that every

man who has se

rved time before is a recidivist”’.

Sir Lionel F

London

195

» at page 279, stresses t

ox in his extremely valuable English Prison and Borstal Systems,

endeavouring to defi

he difficulties facing an English writer

definition—one who h

ne recidivism. He nomin

ally adopts the very wide dictionary

abitually relapses into crime—but then discusses only the

statistics of criminals

in prison who have been there before, and how often. He

thus, in effect, uses a

purely penal definition.

53

of any offence during a period of not less than ten years be-

tween the date of imposition of the current sentence

Difficulties occur when it is asked whether, for purposes of this

type of definition of recidivism, a prior committal to an institution

for juvenile criminals will suffice to categorise a person subsequently

committed to prison as a recidivist. Generally, committal of offenders

under the age of seventeen to reformatories and training schools will

not be regarded as having this effect, while committal of those of

or over, seventeen to reformatories, Borstals, and prisons for young

criminals will be so regarded.

A sentence of Preventive Detention, Corrective Training or any

other form of more protracted, more severe, or more consciously re-

habilitative or community-protective incarceration will, of course,

suffice for purposes of one of the sentences necessary for this

categorlsatlon

Convictions and prlson sentences for certain minor or spe01a1

types of offences, or for brief periods, may be excluded. For example

the Annual.Reports of the English Commissioners of Prisons exclude

offences against the Intoxicating Liquor Laws from the table under

the headmg “Recidivism

, showing the number of persons received

into prison in each year who were known to have been in prison

before.!

Apart from these per1pheral dlﬁicultles thls definition of recidi-

vism is precise and viable in the world’s prisons. It has, however

the defect of being too narrow for wider legal and criminological

purposes than the administration of prisons. Consequently it could

not alone serve as a sufficient bas1s for dlscussmns at the Congress 2

1 Until 1948 these Annual Reports, under the rubric “recidivism contained

only information as to those criminals received into prison (not being remand

prisoners) who had been in prison before (again, other than on remand). After

1948 further information was presented as to those who had previous proved

offences. It could be argued that this represented a change in the Prison Com-

missioners’ definition of * rec1d1v1sm but this is no contradiction of the sub-

mission in the text that as penal admmlstrators prior prison sentences more

influence their decisions than prior convictions; being also criminologists, they

are interested in and supply further information on inmates’ criminal records

3 Mr. T. S. Lodge in his valuable national report for England and Wales takes

me to task for defining recidivist elsewhere (The Habitual Criminal, London,

1951, p. 4) as “one who having previously served a term of imprisonment, or

Borstal training, is sentenced to a term of

imprisonment’’. He points out

that ‘“‘this definition has for some purposes a rather inconvenient degree of

precision; it appears to have validity only at.the time when the new sentence is

passed, and utility only for the purpose of examining to what extent persons do

become so sentenced

it could hardly be used to answer such questions as

54

LEGAL DEFINITION

The gravamen of the penal definition is the fact of a prior term

in prison; the salient feature of the many legal definitions is the

existence of a prior conviction.

Some legal systems use “‘recidivism” and ‘“‘recidivist” as terms of

art. Articles 56 and 57 of the French Penal Code are outstanding in

this respect, giving a precise yet complex meaning to “le récidivisme”

and applying the term in its defined sense elsewhere in the Code.!

Likewise Art. 39 A of the Cuban Code of Social Defence pro-

vides that “Reincidencia’ exists where ‘“‘a criminal has been pre-

viously convicted by a final judgment for another offence of the same

kind”, and Art. 39 B that “Reiterancia’ exists where ‘“‘a criminal

has been previously convicted by a final judgment for one or more

offences of a different kind to the one before the Court”.

Dr. Van de Werk reports a similar legal definition of recidivism

in the Netherlands, applicable both to juvenile and adult criminals:

“the irrevocable conviction for a criminal offence of a person who

has formerly been convicted of such a crime or of any crime”.

Though the majority of legal systems do not define the term

generally in this way, they all appear to make use of the concept.

In applying it, the existence of prior convictions may have three

distinct legal influences on a subsequent charge or conviction for a

criminal offence. This influence of legal recidivism, roughly nomi-

nally defined as the existence of prior convictions of a person sub-

sequently before the Court, may:

(a) increase or vary the sentence;

(b) exclude the offender from certain sentences; and

(c) create ligbility in him for otherwise innocent acts.

It is necessary to deal with these three eﬂ’écts seriatim.

. - . What proportion of indictable offences are committed by recidivists?”’ With

this I entirely a

gree. The definition criticised was essentially a penal definition

of recidivism a

nd was used for purpose of a penological analysis. It is not useful

for wid

er legal or criminolog

in the first instance, to defi

ical enquiries. This fact underlines the need, certainly

the problem to which it is

ne this term with reference to the type and scope of

to be applied.

! Charles Germain, Le

Traitement des Récidivistes en France, Melun, 1953,

gives an excellent insi

Code.

ght into the actual operation of these provisions 'of_ the

55

(A) INCREASE OR VARIATION OF THE SENTENCE—

POSITIVE STATUTORY PROVISIONS

Without any statutory warrant, the judge imposing sentence will

tend to be influenced by the existence of prior convictions to increase

the punishment he would otherwise impose. He will incline to regard

the prior convictions as indicating both the clearer guilt and the

greater dangerousness of the criminal. This aggravation of the

punishment of a recidivist, independent of any statutory direction,

is likely to apply whenever the judge has a discretion in determining

the punishment he will inflict; it constitutes probably the main effect

of recidivism on the sentencing process.! The rationale of this

aggravation of punishment because of the presence of recidivism

does not fall within the province of an analysis of the definition of

that term; but it is a matter meriting study in the light of our develop-

ing techniques of predicting criminal behaviour. It needs no further

discussion as a problem in definition; that this concept of recidivism

exists and has this effect can hardly be doubted.

The increase of punishment of a criminal owing to his conviction

on one occasion of more than one offence, though akin to the in-

creased punishment of recidivists, does not fall within the concept

of recidivism. It has been excluded from this report. Both recidivism

and multiple offences lead to increased punishment, but the justifica-

tions for the increase differ. Further, if multiple offences without

prior conviction suffice to categorise a criminal as a recidivist, the

whole concept would become unserviceably wide.?

The search for a legal definition involves a narrower inquiry.

What statutory provisions vary the sentence which may be imposed

on a recidivist in any legal system? Or, put differently, who is a

recidivist in any legal system on whom a different or greater punish-

ment may or must be inflicted? Leaving aside the general definitions

mentioned above, we find ourselves surrounded by the widest diver-

sity of answers to this question given by the world’s legal systems.

The only fixed point is the requirement of a definite conviction

followed by a subsequent conviction on a later occasion. Beyond

1 At the First International Penal and Penitentiary Congress, held in London

in 1872, it was generally agreed that longer sentences should be imposed on

recidivists by the judges. See discussions pursuant to question 14.

* Father Beausoleil’s report concurs expressly in the exclusion of a conviction

for multiple offences from the definition of recidivism; the other reports do so

inferentially.

56

this we must plunge into a remarkable diversity of legislative

provisions.!

Statutory provisions having an effect on the sentence for the reci-

divist offence may be either mandatory or discretionary; either com-

pelling the court in circumstances of recidivism to impose a certain

sentence, or a sentence of not less than a prescribed minimum and

not more than a prescribed maximum (both minimum and maximum

being higher than for a first conviction), or alternatively empowering

the judge in his discretion to impose a more severe or different type

of sentence.

Examples: (1) Mandatory sentence.

(a) Professor Thorsten Sellin reports an Act of 1666 in Mary-

land which “provided that if a person was convicted of

stealing a hog he should, for the first offence, be placed in

the pillory for four hours; if he committed a second theft

of the same kind he was to be branded on the forehead with

the letter H and if he nevertheless repeated the crime, he

was subject to the death penalty”.

(b)

Professor von Weber reports several such statu’tory pro-

visions. One is the mandatory increase of punishment on

account of recidivism required by Art. 30, S. II of a German

Act of 28th April, 1930, dealing with the sale of alcohol to

children and adolescents.

(¢) The Baumes Law in New York and similar legislation in

other States of the United States of America, requiring the

Court to impose a life sentence on those convicted on the

third or fourth occasions of felonies, are well-known

examples of mandatory sentences for certain types of

recidivists.2

(d)

Dr. Goziibiiyiik reports that a mandatory increase of sen-

tence owing to recidivism is on occasions required in the

Codes of France, Hungary, Germany, Portugal, Switzer-

land, Italy and Turkey.

! The legal solutions to this

problem are often widely diverse even within one

country. See, for example, pa

ges 17 to 21 of Professor Thorsten Sellin’s Treat-

ment of the Recidivist in the Unit

ed States, English Studies in Criminal Science

Pamphlet Series (also published i

n the Cana

dian Bar Review of October, 1945).

?See Paul W. Tappan, Habitual

Offender Laws in the United States (1949),

Vol. 13, Federal Probation, 28.

57

Examples: (2) Mandatory different range.

(a) Professor Thorsten Sellin reports a Colorado Act of 1929 by

which “a person who, after having been convicted . . . of

any of the following felonies: (here follows a list of the

more serious felonies); or, under the laws of any other state,

government or country, of a crime which if committed

within this state, would be such a felony, commits such

felony, within this state, upon conviction of such second

offence, shall be sentenced to a term of not less than one-

third the longest term, nor more than twice the longest

term, prescribed upon a first conviction’.

(b)

Californian Penal Code, Sec. 3024—*The following shall

be the minimum term of sentence and imprisonment . . .

notwithstanding any other provisions of this code, or any

provision of law specifying a lesser sentence;

. . for a

pefson previously convicted of a felony . . ., five years.”

Examples: (3) Discretionary.

(a) Professor Thorsten Sellin reports concerning the United

States that ‘“‘in one-third of the states the imposition of

more severe punishments on recidivists is discretionary with

the courts”.

(b)

Dr. Coffrie reports that under ““the Netherlands Penal Code

the maxima of the penalties which may be inflicted owing

to certain delicts may be raised by one-third in case of

repetition after a previous conviction on account of the

same or a similar delict within a certain lapse of time™,

“The above eXamples are the prototypes of the positive legal effects

of recidivism. A wide range of factors is encompassed by the world’s

legislatures in framing these statutes. The leading considerations are:

(a) Types of Offence. Frequently the recidivist statutes apply only

to crimes of‘'a certain gravity.

For example:

(1) Professor Van Bemmelen reports the exclusion of sex

~crimes from the Dutch recidivist provisions.

(i) Dr. Goziibiiyiik reports that ‘““les infractions commises par

imprudence, celles exclusivement militaires, et les condam-

nations prononcées a I’étranger ne sauraient fonder la

58

récidive (Code Pénal Turc du 1" mars 1926, article 87)

excepté articles 316-331 en ce qui concerne du faux con-

cernant les monnaies ou les titres reposant sur le crédit

public, 332-331 de la contrefacon des sceaux, timbres

publics

et empreintes et 403-404 délits contre la santé

x de stupé-

publique, commerce clandestin Qu frauduleu

fiants”’.

(ii1)

Most countries exclude minor offences, differently defined,

from their statutory provisions concerning recidivism.

(b) Number of offences. Many statutes require more than one pre-

vious conviction.!

For example:

(i) Professor Thorsten Sellin reports that ‘“‘some American

states make no distinction in the law between first and later

offenders; others provide no increased penalties for second

offenders but do so upon a third and later conviction™.

Professor von Weber reports that for the mandatory in-

(fi)

crease of sentences because of recidivism under German

law,. though for robbery the first recidivist conviction suf-

fices, the increase is not operative in respect of other

offences until the second recidivist conviction.

(c) Specificity of Offences. Some statutes require that the subsequent

conviction should be for the same crime as the offender previously

committed.

For example:

Dealing with the manda_tory'inc,rease of sentence because of

_(i)

recidivism under German law, Professor von Weber reports

that in the cases of receiving stolen goods and fraud only

prior convictions in respect of the same type of offence are

operative.

!

(1) Californian Penal Co

dé; Sec. 666: “Every person who, hav-

ing been convicted of petit larceny or petit theft and having

served a term therefore as follows: . . . 3. If the subsequent

conviction is for petit theft, then the person convicted of

such subsequent offence is punishable by imprisonment in

the county gaol not exceeding one year, or in the State

prison not exceeding ﬁ\(e years.”

1 Here we trespass into the problem of the definitions of habitual criminal

and professional criminal, to be mentioned and distinguished hereunder.

59

Other statutes require only a degree of specificity and apply when

the subsequent offence is of a similar type to that previously com-

mitted.

For example:

(1) Dealing with the mandatory increase of sentence because of

recidivism under German law, Professor von Weber reports

that in the cases of robbery, theft, and tax offences prior

convictions in respect of similar types of offences are suffi-

cient.

(i1)

Under Cuban law, “‘reincidencia’ (as distinct from “‘reite-

rancia’), noted above.

(1ii)

Dr. Goziibilyiik reports that Turkey has adopted a mixed

system of general and special recidivism, and describes how

under the latter provisions ‘“le code pénal turc exige que

la seconde infraction soit de la méme nature que la premiére

et il indique dans quelle mesure la peine doit étre aggravée”.

See Art. 81 of the Turkish Penal Code of 1926.

Yet other statutes require no such similarity between the offence(s)

which led to the prior conviction(s) and the present offences, other

than by way of excluding offences of lesser gravity.!

For example:

(1) Professor Thorsten Sellin reports that “‘a statute adopted in

1927 in Florida requires that a person previously convicted

of any felony shall be punished more severely if he is con-

victed later of any felony, with life imprisonment for a

fourth felony conviction™.

(ii) Dr. Goziibiiyiik reports that this type of general recidivism

legislation is adopted by France, Belgium, Switzerland,

Italy, Turkey and other countries.

(iii) Professor von Weber cites the general recidivist provisions

in Art. 20a of the German Penal Code.

(d) Length, Type and Number of Previous Sentences.

Some recidivist statutes exclude previous sentences of less than a

prescribed duration. We have noted that some statutes dealing with

recidivism require more than one previous sentence. Generally, there

is a considerable range in the statutory definitions of these factors.

1 The suggestion that some degree of specificity in his offences should be re-

quired before a criminal can properly be regarded as a recidivist was rejected at

the Fifth International Penal and Penitentiary Congress held in Paris in 1895,

60

(¢) Interval between Convictions.

Many statutes provide that if a stated period of time (usually S or

10 years) elapses between one conviction and the next, not counting

the period actually spent in prison, the offender shall not be sentenced

for the subsequent offence as a recidivist.

For example:

(i) Five year limitation periods, excluding the actual period in

prison, are prescribed in Germany (for some offences) and

Turkey.

(ii) Ten year limitation periods, excluding the actual period in

prison, are prescribed in Germany (for some offences),

Portugal, Hungary, Switzerland and other countries.

(iii) The French and Italian Penal Codes set no temporal limit

to the operative effect of the first conviction on subsequent

convictions.!

(f) Sex.

Some of these statutes apply equally to men and women, others

are restricted to men (pimping; arts. 180 and 18la of German

Criminal Code), yet others (e.g. prostitution) tend to be restricted

to women.

(g) Age.

Convictions recorded and sentences served prior to the criminals

attaining a prescribed age are often excluded from these statutes.

The same effect is often achieved under (d) above by excluding

sentences imposable only on young offenders.

At the Sixth International Penal and Penitentiary Congress held

in Brussels in 1900 it was expressly decided that the concept of reci-

divism is inapplicable to juvenile offenders (Section IV, Question 1).

(h) Foreign Convictions.

Some statutes include, some exclude, convictions by foreign courts.

For example:

(1) Californian Penal Code, Sec. 668: “Every person who has

been convicted in any other state, government, country, or

jurisdiction of an offence for which, if committed within

this State such person could have been punished under the

1 This is a somewhat strange omission from the French legislation in that the

French law of 27 May, 1885, concerning Relégation applied a ten-year limitation

pericd.

61

laws of this State by imprisonment in a state prison, is

punishable for any subsequent crime committed within this

State in the manner prescribed in sections 644, 666 and 667,

and to the same extent as if such prior conviction had taken

place in a court of this State.” See also Sec. 3024 (g).

(ii)

Drs. Coello and Raggi report that under the provisions of

the Cuban Code dealing with recidivism, the courts are

directed to take into account sentences passed by foreign

tribunals, in accordance with the recognition of foreign

judgment provisions embodied in international conven-

tions and treaties to which Cuba is a party.

(iii)

Professor von Weber reports that the German provisions

exclude from consideration for these purposes sentences

passed by other than German courts. This does not require

that the place of commission of the previous crime has to

be in Germany, but does require that the previous sentence

was a sentence of a German court. Thus, sentences of

foreign courts sitting in Germany are excluded.

The Turkish Penal Code excludes foreign convictions from

(iv)

its recidivism provisions.

(1) Other factors.

A final ““blanket” category is necessary. As well as various com-

binations of the above factors, the court may be directed by Statute

to punish the criminal as a recidivist only when some other factor

is present, the most common requirements being the court’s positive

prognostication as to his need for certain penal treatment or as to

his dangerousness.

For example:

(i) A court can impose Corrective Training in England

(Criminal Justice Act, 1948, S. 21) on a criminal not less

than twenty-one years of age, convicted on indictment of an

offence punishable with imprisonment for a term of two

years or more, and who has been convicted on at least two

previous occasions since he attained the age of seventeen of

offences so punishable only “if the court is satisfied that a

sentence of Corrective Training is expedient with a view to

his reformation and the prevention of crime.”

(ii) A finding of ‘“‘dangerousness’ must be made by the court

before sentencing a recidivist under Article 20a of the

German Criminal Code.

62

The above 1s no more than an outline survey of the elements from

which various legal systems construct their statutes compelling or

empowering a court, because of recidivism, to increase or vary the

punishment to be imposed on a criminal. We have yet to note the

negative effects of similar statutes impinging on recidivists and the

effect of recidivism as creating offences.

(B) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN SENTENCES

NEGATIVE STATUTORY PROVISIONS

A few statutes exclude previously convicted criminals from certain

types of punishment. To an extent the mandatory sentences and the

fixed minimum sentences mentioned above have this effect; but there

are more specific examples of which the clearest is the denial by the

German Criminal Code of Probation to one previously sentenced.

For example:

Professor von Weber reports that the Amendment of the

Criminal Code of the 4th of August, 1953, prohibited the

courts from imposing a suspended sentence on probation on

a criminal who during the five years preceding the offence in

question had been sentenced in Germany to terms of im-

prisonment totalling 6 months or more, or if during this

period a previous sentence of imprisonment had been sus-

pended on probation or pardoned.

(C) RECIDIVISM CREATING OFFENCES

Many legal systems impose limitations on those who have been

regularly convicted of certain offences. A reputed thief in many

Countries commits an offence if he has in his possession housebreak-

ing implements. To be a reputed thief he must be a recidivist. The

possession of these chattels by another person would lead to no

conviction.

For example:

(1) Art. 245a of the German Criminal Code prohibits those

previously convicted of certain prescribed offences from

being in possession of certain tools frequently used by

housebreakers and thieves. Art. 296 creates similar offences

63

in respect of implements for hunting and fishing found in

the possession of those previously convicted for professional

or habitual poaching or who have been convicted more

than once for poaching. Likewise, those repeatedly con-

victed of cruelty to animals may be forbidden to keep or

trade in certain animals either permanently or for a pre-

scribed period.

(ii)

Similar provisions apply in Germany and in other countries

to those regularly convicted in respect of the illegal sale of

alcohol.

(ii)) An interesting example is the legislation in the States of

New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland in Australia

making it an offence for a criminal with a prescribed

number of convictions to consort with other known

criminals.

It may be argued that the above are merely limitations on the

civil status of discharged criminals; but as they apply only to pre-

viously convicted criminals and make for them an action criminal

which for one not so convicted would not be punishable, it is sub-

mitted that they can properly be regarded as part of the legal defini-

tion of recidivism.

Before attempting to draw together this complex range of statutory

provisions defining recidivism for a diversity of different legal pur-

poses, it is perhaps necessary to mention the allied problem of the

definitions of ‘‘habitual criminal’’ and ‘“‘professional criminal’’.

The habitual criminal may be regarded as one species of the

generic class recidivist, most legal systems applying definitions of

habitual criminals which categorise such criminals as a special type

of more persistent, or more habituated, or more settled in crime, or

more frequently punished recidivists. Any further analysis of the

concept ‘‘habitual criminal” lies, fortunately, outside the scope of

this general report; all that need be noted is that most legal systems

define this concept specially and usually with more precision than

the wider group of recidivists and that genus recidivist normally

includes the species habitual criminal.!

1 One nominal definition of ‘“habitual criminal” for purposes of studies in

comparative law is ‘“‘one who possesses criminal qualities inherent or latent in

his mental constitution (but is not insane or mentally deficient); who has mani-

fested a settled practice in crime, and who presents a danger to the society in

which he lives (but is not merely a prostitute, vagrant, habitual drunkard or

habitual petty delinquent)”.

64

However, this is not always the case. Under the German Criminal

Code, a criminal may be punished as a “Dangerous Habitual

Criminal” without having incurred any prior convictions. Art. 20a of

the Code defines this category, and whereas Section I of that article

requires that the criminal has already suffered two prior convictions,

Section I empowers the court to punish the criminal as a dangerous

habitual criminal, even though he lacks prior convictions, if he has

committed at least three wilful (vorsitzliche) criminal actions. But

this provision is exceptional and the general rule is that all habitual

criminals are recidivists.

“Professional Criminal” stands on a different footing. A profes-

sional criminal will normally be a recidivist, but neither in crimino-

logical theory nor in law need he be such. Studies such as those of

Sutherland have demonstrated what acquaintance with any com-

munity suggests—that professional criminals may for protracted

periods avoid conviction. Al Capone was convicted of tax fraud.

Abortion, illegal gambling, and receiving stolen goods are examples

of crimes frequently professionally pursued—for these, the circum-

stances surrounding the first conviction may suffice to indicate the

professional quality of the criminal’s activities. Some legal systems

are therefore satisfied to treat a criminal as a professional criminal

even though he may lack a prior conviction and hence not be appro-

priately categorised as a recidivist. This is so pursuant to the follow-

ing articles of the German Criminal Code: 175a, and 361 combined

with 42d (prostitution), 180 and 181a (procuring and pimping), 260

(receiving), 285 (gambling), 292 and 293 (poaching), 302d and e

(usury), and also those articles dealing with begging, smuggling and

.

certain tax offences.

Thus “habitual criminal” is essentially a species of the genus

“‘recidivist”; “professional criminal”’, though an overlapping group,

i1s by no means necessarily included in the genus. That similar or

identical penal measures are used for all three may merely reflect, not

the similarity between these types of criminals, but the remarkably

limited range of weapons in our penal arsenal which compels us to

use the same weapon for different purposes.

Drawing together the ideas behind the legal definition of recidivism

and leaving aside the problem of distinguishing the concepts of

habitual criminality and professional criminality, it appears: the legal

definition is based on the prior conviction(s) of a criminal currently

before the court and uses such refining factors as the type, number and

specificity and place of the previous offences, the length, number and

type of his previous sentences, the interval between convictions, the

criminal’s sex and age, and other factors. It may increase, vary and/or

65

CC—E

exclude the sentence otherwise imposable for the offence and may make

actions criminal that are otherwise innocent. Legal systems differ

widely in their techniques of adapting these factors to the treatment

of crime within their jurisdiction; their legislative methods having

developed piecemeal at different times, motivated by different

criminological pressures.!

CRIMINOLOGICAL DEFINITION

The prison administrator develops his definition of recidivism

around prior prison sentences: the lawyer and legislator around prior

and present convictions of crime; the criminologist’s canvas is larger

and his definition consequently avoids so far as possible the for-

tuitousness of penal and legal processes. It concentrates on the reality

of relapsing into crime after conviction, seeking to isolate the failures

of our correctional methods. For the criminologist, a recidivist is one

who, having been the subject of a prior conviction, subsequently commits

a crime, whether he is or is not detected in this subsequent crime.2

This definition is speculative and far from refined. It may be neces-

sary to render it more precise by incorporating other factors similar

to those adumbrated under the legal definition—type, number,

gravity of prior offences, age, sex, psychological condition of the

criminal, and so on. But the essential point is this—the criminologist

will not require a subsequent conviction for the purposes of his

definition.® (This is inferentially supported in the reports by Pro-

1 Professor von Weber stresses this concerning the various German statutory

provisions on this subject,—they differ widely in purpose and method, owing to

differences of purpose lying behind their introduction and their introduction at

different times.

2 It could be argued that the criminologist requires an even wider definition,

excluding from it also the fortuitousness of the conviction for the prior offence

and making the definition turn on the criminal’s prior detection in crime by the

police (or even by anyone else). Thus, if though the police are satisfied that X has

committed a crime and a prosecution is not instituted for lack of evidence, or for

other reasons, or if the prosecution does not culminate in a conviction, then if X

did in fact commit the crime and subsequently commits another crime he might

be classed as a recidivist. Though logically attractive, this would for present

purposes of criminological research be impractically wide.

8 Dr. Griinhut, Penal Reform, Oxford, 1948, page 387: ‘‘Recidivism means the

commission of a new offence after the expiration of a sentence for a previous

breach of the law.”

Stephan Hurwitz, Criminology, London, 1952, page 396: “The term recidivist

implies no more than that the person in question, after having been convicted,

has offended once more.”

66

fessor Christie,! Father Beausoleil,?2 and Dr. Goziibiiyiik.3) The

criminologist is interested in the success o

f correctional process, the

to different types of

adaptation of these processes most efficiently

criminals, and the protection of the community; hence he must

categorise a criminal as a recidivist at an earlier stage than does the

penal administrator or lawye

r

dies, notably those of the Gluecks, have

Only in a few follow-up stu

criminologists gained any real understanding of the pro

blem of reci-

divism defined in this way. Only defined in this way in the concept

logically adapted to evaluating and hence developing our correc-

tional processes.

CONCLUSION

The essential unifying concept behind recidivism is the repetition

of crime after conviction. The penal administrator tends to test this

reappearance as a con-

by reappearance in prison; the lawyer by

victed person in court; while the criminologist desire

s to test it by

the subsequent commission of crime. The penal, legal and crimino-

logical definitions will all be narrowed by the interpolation of many

other factors qualifying the personality of the offender and the type

and number of his crimes and sentences; these will vary according

to the particular proposition or inquiry concerning recidivism being

made and will vary considerably from one legal system to another

and from one criminological, legal and penal inquiry to another.

! Professor Christie gives an even wider definition holding that ‘“‘recidivism

can be said to occur when an individual, subjected to previous sanctions for an

act, embarks upon new actions which may lead to new sanctions. The action

need not be a breach of law, and the sanction need not be ‘punishment’ in the

usual juridical meaning. It can be just as interesting, from both a general social

science and from a criminal political viewpoint, to know how many vagrants

abandon the permanent residence procured for them and again take to new

wandering, as to know how many thieves revert to stealing. The criteria for what

recidivism is will accordingly vary from study to study”’.

2 Father Beausoleil “celui qui retombe dans le crime aprés avoir subi une

condamnation”.

3 Dr. Goziibityiik “celui qui, dans les conditions déterminées par la loi,

commet une infraction, aprés avoir encouru au moins une condamnation pénale

devenue définitive”’.

67

SECTION I

LES DEFINITIONS DE LA RECIDIVE

ET LEUR IMPORTANCE POUR LES STATISTIQUES

de M. Roland Grassberger

I. — DEFINITION

1

ELEMENTS DE DEFINITION

La récidive est une notion connue dans la médicine aussi bien que

dans le droit, domaines dans lesquels elle désigne des phénoménes

semblables. Le médecin entend par récidive la réapparition d’une

maladie déja terminée. 1l dit par 12 que les deux phénomeénes con-

sidérés sous le point de vue de la récidive, d’une part se différencient,

mais d’autre part ont des traits communs.

Il y a différence en ce qu’il ne s’agit pas d’une continuation pure

et stmple de la maladie originale, mais d’une reprise d’un processus

extérieurement arrivé a son terme. Entre les deux maladies il y a une

césure, le bien-€tre récupéré au moins pendant quelque temps. Ce

qu’il y a de commun entre les deux phénoménes, c’est que la nouvelle

maladie s’explique par P'effet des mémes causes qui avaient provoqué

la premic¢re maladie. Pour qualifier de récidive une maladie, il im-

porte peu que ’amélioration intermittente se soit produite spontané-

ment ou par suite de 'intervention du médecin.

Les mémes critéres existent en ce qui concerne le probléme de la

récidive dans le domaine du droit. La maladie joue dans le domaine

de la médecine le méme rdle que le comportement criminel dans le

droit pénal. Les deux événements que le juriste considére sous I’aspect

de la récidive sont le délit initial et la nouvelle infraction appelée

récidive. Ces deux actions doivent étre séparées dans le temps par

une période de bonne conduite, de sorte que la nouvelle infraction ne

peut étre considérée comme une simple continuation du premier

délit. Dans le domaine du droit également il faudra qu’il y ait entre

les deux événements rattachés par les caractéristiques de la récidive

une relation interne qui résulte des forces agissantes de la person-

nalité du coupable.

Cependant il existe entre la médecine et le droit une différence

68

fondamentale quant a la conception et au traitement de la récidive.

Si c’est uniquement 1’affaire du médecin traitant de qualifier une

maladie de récidive et de prendre les mesures en conformité, le prin-

cipe de I’égalité devant la loi exige par contre dans le droit une défi-

nition tres précise des caractéristiques de la récidive et des sanctions

qu’elle entraine, définition qui est alors valable pour tous.

2. LE PREMIER DELIT

Dans le sens large du terme on parlera de récidive dans tous les

cas ou il y a deux infractions différentes qui ne constituent pas seule-

ment deux parties du méme crime. D’aprés cette conception il y a

récidive a partir du moment ou se termine I’action continue d’un seul

et méme crime. Comme le médecin parle de récidive méme si la

période de santé n’est pas ’effet d’une thérapeutique, la punition du

premier délit, selon cette conception, n’est pas un des critéres de la

récidive.

Cest ainsi que le R. P. BEAUSOLEIL (Canada) mentionne par

exemple dans les statistiques de la récidive également des individus

condamnés par le tribunal pour plusieurs délits. HURWITZ lui aussi,

dans son manuel de criminologie bien connu, ne se prononce pas

absolument contre une conception aussi large de la récidive.

D’aprés 1a doctrine généralement admise on ne parle cependant

pas dans ce cas de

récidive, mais on rassemble ces phénoménes dans

1

a catégorie de la concurrence de crimes et du délit collectif. Des

crimes répétés et cumulés sont d’aprés elle, tout comme le délit pro-

fessionnel et habituel, seulement I’indice de P’attitude asociale du

malfaiteur. En tant que tels, cependant, ils ont dans le droit pénal

moderne ol I’attention est centrée plutdt sur le malfaiteur que sur

Pinfraction, d

es effets semblables a la récidive au sens propre quand

il s’agit de fix

er la peine.

Cette conception ressort trés clairement de 1’article 20 a du

“Reichsstrafgesetzbuch” allemand (rapport de M. H. v. WEBER)

selon lequel sont malfaiteurs habituels dangereux, non seulement

ceux qui ont été condamnés deux fois, le jugement ayant acquis force

de chose jugée, mais également ceux qui ont commis au moins trois

infractions

d

€ presque tous les

avec prémeditation. De méme il y a dans le code pénal

pays des dispositions spéciales pour des infrac-

tions professionnell

parfois plus sévéres

s ou continues pour lesquelles les peines sont

que pour la récidive au sens restreint.

Récidive au sens restreint. 11 y a récidive au sens restreint si la

nouvelle infraction est précédée d’au moins une condamnation

criminelle. Pour la doctrine généralement admise, qui ne parle de

69

récidive que sous ces conditions, le malfaiteur récidiviste est essen-

tiellement caractérisé non pas tellement par son attitude asociale

en général que par le fait que ’admonestation que constitue une

condamnation ne I’a pas influencé.

Ainsi, d’apres le droit canon des Glossataires, I’on considérait

déja que cette incorrigibilité rendait la récidive particuliément sujette

a réprobation: humanum est peccare, diabolicum perseverare. Au

XVIe siécle il en résulta la pratique généralement répandue de se

contenter de mettre le malfaiteur au pilori a la premicre infraction —

excepté pour les crimes capitaux évidemment — et de lui infliger une

punition plus sévére seulement en cas de récidive. Cette pratique

n’était d’ailleurs pas seulement courante sur le continent européen,

mais d’aprés M. SELLIN une loi de I’année 1666 du Maryland prouve

qu’elle existait également dans le Nouveau Monde.

Tandis que dans un certain nombre de pays les sanctions de la

récidive sont applicables du seul fait d’'une condamnation antérieure,

comme pas exemple en Allemagne et en Hollande, d’autres codes

comme celui de I’Autriche, de I’Angleterre, de la Suisse ou de la

Turquie prévoient I’application de la peine plus sévére en cas de

récidive seulement si le malfaiteur a déja purgé une peine privative

de liberté. Ces lois sont également basées sur 'idée que ce n’est pas

I’attitude asociale qui se manifeste par cette infraction répétée, mais

I'incorrigibilité dont I’accusé fait preuve.

Une telle attitude est notamment indiquée si le malfaiteur qualifié

de récidiviste est frappé de sanctions toutes particuliéres comme par

exemple la relégation. Le législateur pense alors ne pas pouvoir se

limiter aux mesures normales de la punition qui visent en premier

lieu I’illégalité du fait méme. La peine a infliger dépendra dans ce cas

du danger des tendances de réaction fondées dans la personnalité du

malfaiteur — et c’est pourquoi il est tres difficile de juger de ce

danger. La sévérité qui semble extraordinaire en proportion avec

’acte incriminé par lui-méme exige un critére objectif qui réside dans

I’incorrigibilit¢é manifestée du fait de la récidive. Sans ce critére

objectif il y aurait danger d’arbitraire ce qui serait contraire au

syst¢tme d’un Etat constitutionnel.

Ceci nous méne a une récidive qualifiée toute particuliére, carac-

térisée par la nature et le nombre des condamnations antérieures.

Ainsi par exemple sera relégué comme criminel habituel selon ’art.

42, n° 1 du Code pénal suisse seulement celui qui aura purgé au moins

quatre peines privatives de liberté pour crimes et délits. La loi

autrichienne sur les travaux forcés du 10 juin 1932 prévoit également

qu’on pourra condamner aux travaux forcés uniquement celui qui

aura été condamné de nouveau, pour un crime, a une peine privative

70

de liberté de six mois au moins aprés avoir déja purgé auparavant

trois peines privatives de liberté au moins.

Par rapport au premier délit créant la récidive il y a donc les

possibilités suivantes d’une définition de la récidive au sens le plus

large:

1. récidive au sens impropre: concurrence de délits, délits répétés

et délit collectif (il n’y a pas de jugement du tribunal entre le

délit initial et le second délit);

récidive au sens propre (le second délit est commis apres inter-

vention du juge qui a prononcé une condamnation au sujet du

délit initial):

(a) récidive non qualifiée (il suffit qu’il y ait condamnation pour

le délit initial, la peine ne doit pas étre purgée nécessaire-

ment);

(b) récidive qualifiée simple (la récidive s’est produite apres

I’expiration de la peine);

(c¢) récidive spécialement qualifiée (récidive réitérée et récidive

aprés expiration de peines privatives de liberté de nature

et durée déterminées).

3. LEks RAPPORTS ENTRE LE DELIT INITIAL ET LE SECOND DELIT

Tandis que pour le médicin il va de soi qu’il recherche en tout cas

les rapports existant entre la premicre et la seconde maladie avant

de conclure a une rechute, on considére dans le droit pénal qu’ily a

récidive souvent sans examen approfondi en se basant sur le fait qu’il

Sagit du méme malfaiteur. Le juriste familier des présomptions

légales s’accorde assez facilement d’une telle solution forcée parce

qu’elle lui donne la possibilité de juger de la méme fagon, et d’une

fagon trés simple, des cas qui ont une ressemblance extéricure. Pour-

tant il doit lui aussi reconnaitre que, quand les deux infractions a la

loi qu’il doit juger sont éloignées dans le temps, le fait qu’elles sont

causées par le méme individu est plutdt une coincidence du hasard et

de certaines conditions extérieures. De trés grands intervalles dans la

récidive ne font guére penser que les infractions soient uniquement

Peffet des facteurs crimino

genes agissant chez le malfaiteur. Ceci nous

mene A Pinstitution de la

prescription de la récidive comme présomp-

tion particuliére du droj

t. Elle exclut la présomption d’un rapport

interne entre les deux ac

le délit initial.

tions si un certain délai s’est écoulé depuis

La récidive sans délai existe seulement dans trés peu de codes.

Des sanctions particuliéres prévues par la loj pour la nouvelle infrac-

tion ne semblent admissibles, puisqu’elles visent plutt le danger que

71

constitue le malfaiteur que le caractére illicite de son action, que si

la récidive s’est produite dans un certain délai. Ce délai, dans la plu-

part des pays, est fixé a cinq ans & partir du jour de la libération si

une peine a été purgée pour le délit initial, dans les autres cas & partir

de la date de la condamnation.

Dans des cas exceptionnels la loi tient compte de la durée de la

peine privative de liberté. Ainsi par exemple M. G6zUBUYUK com-

munique que selon le droit turc les aggravations de peine frappant le

récidiviste sont applicables en cas de récidive aprés une peine de cinq

ans au moins purgée pour le délit initial si le malfaiteur est con-

damné A nouveau dans un délai de dix ans. Si les peines privatives de

liberté sont de durée plus courte ou si aucune peine privative de

liberté n’a ¢€té expiée, le second délit ne sera considéré comme

récidive que s’il se produit dans un délai de cinq ans aprés I’expiration

de la peine. Telle est une autre régle également valable en Turquie.

Dans beaucoup de cas le 1égislateur ne se borne pas au seul fait

d’une nouvelle infraction, mais il exige des preuves d’un rapport

interne entre le délit initial et le second délit. Ceci est le cas tout par-

ticulierement quand les sanctions de la récidive sont particuliérement

séveres.

Pour qualifier ce rapport, on a suivi des procédés divers. Certains

codes constatent qu’il y a récidive seulement si les deux délits

correspondent au méme état de fait visé par une loi, par exemple deux

vols. D’autres codes ne sont pas si rigides et se contentent de la seule

ressemblance des deux infractions, on parle dans ce cas de la ““récidive

d’affinité”.

Est ressemblance pour les uns 'identité de P’objet de I'infraction,

puis pour d’autres les moyens de commettre I’infraction ou bien le

motif du délit. Si I’on tient compte de ’objet de I’infraction, il y aura

récidive d’affinité pour délits contre la propriété par exemple s’il

s’agit de vol, de fraude ou de détérioration volontaire du bien

d’autrui. Si par contre I’on se base sur le mobile de I'infraction, par

exemple 'intention de se procurer des avantages financiers, le vol, la

fraude et la vente professionnels d’imprimés pornographiques seront

des délits semblables, mais non pas vol et détérioration volontaire de

la propriété d’autrui.

Des lois récentes évitent de trop spécifier le second délit consti-

tuant la récidive, mais adoptent un point de vue plus général, selon

lequel il y a rapport interne entre les deux délits par le penchant

asocial du malfaiteur. Par 1a il est possible de beaucoup mieux tenir

compte des défauts caractériels qui sont essentiels pour la récidive.

Souvent la cause de I’attitude asociale réside moins dans le carac-

tére des mobiles que dans I’anormalité des inhibitions. Une telle ligne

72

générale tient bien mieux compte de la nature méme du phénomeéne

qu’une longue énumération, si compléte soit-elle. Elle permet par

exemple de parler de récidive dans le cas ou le failli qui est devenu

insolvable du fait de son insouciance en mati¢re d’argent cause plus

tard un accident en conduisant sa voiture sans tenir aucun compte des

autres véhicules ou des piétons; dans les deux infractions sa tendance

répréhensible consistait en I'incapacité d’adapter son rythme de vie

aux besoins de la société.

En tenant compte du rapport interne entre le premier et le second

délit, il existe les possibilités suivants de distinguer dans la définition

les différentes sortes de récidive:

1. Selon l’intervalle entre les deux infractions:

(a) La récidive sans limite dans le temps (elle ne joue un role

dans la pratique que comme motif aggravant dans le cadre

de la peine portée par la loi et dans la mesure ou elle exclut

I’application de certaines dispositions en faveur du mal-

faiteur sans antécédents judiciaires).

(b) La récidive qui s’est produite dans un certain délai (dans de

nombreux codes elle est frappée de peines plus sévéres ou est

au moins une des conditions pour ’application des mesures

de sécurité qui frappent le malfaiteur habituel).

2. Selon la nature du second délit:

(a) La récidive spéciale (est considérée récidive seulement la

répétition du délit initial).

(b) “La récidive d’affinité” (est considérée récidive seulement

une infraction qui, dans les faits ou dans les mobiles psycho-

logiques, présente des traits en commun avec le délit initial.

Ces traits en commun peuvent étre:

(aa) I’objet du délit;

(bb) le modus operandi par exemple violence;

(cc) le mobile essentiel de I’action;

(dd) la tendance répréhensible qui est a la base du com-

portement du malfaiteur.

(c) la récidive non-identique (est considérée récidive toute ac-

tion repréhensible).

4. LE SECOND DELIT

Les sanctions

prevues dans le code pour la récidive tiennent sou-

vent égal

cment com

préjudiciabl

pte de la mesure dans laquelle le second délit est

e a la société. Le principe ‘‘Minimat non curat Preator”

est égalem

ent valable dans un certain sens pour le second délit.

73

Certainement les sanctions de la récidive visent en premier lieu le

danger pour la société qui consiste dans le penchant criminel du

malfaiteur, mais a c6té de cette composante subjective il ne faut pas

perdre de vue la nature de la tendance criminelle du malfaiteur. La

société supportera plus facilement les infractions d’un resquilleur

habituel dans le tramway que les manifestations criminelles d’un

meurtrier qui résultent d’une vie sexuelle complétement pervertie. -

En conséquence les sanctions prévues pour la récidive sont adap-

tées soit a la nature du second délit, soit a la peine encourue pour ce

délit. Ceci est facile a faire si la sanction se différencie de la peine

elle-méme par son caracteére de mesure de sécurité.

Ainsi, en tenant compte de 'intensité du préjudice causé au droit,

les critéres suivants sont également valables pour classifier la récidive:

1. second délit en général (I'intensité du préjudice causé au droit

ne compte pas);

2. second délit spécifié (le second délit n’entraine les sanctions de

la récidive que:

(a) si le second délit est de nature spécifiée, par exemple crime

et non pas délit;

(b) s’il entraine peine spécifiée, par exemple réclusion et non

pas prison;

(c) s’il entraine une peine durée spécifiée, par exemple une

peine privative de liberté de plus de six mois).

5. RESULTATS

Les considérations précédentes ont montré qu’il n’y a pas une

définition unique de la récidive, mais que le contexte doit toujours

tenir compte du but visé. Le statisticien entend par récidive le seul

fait de I’existence d’une condamnation antérieure. Le droit pénal par

contre fait la différence selon la mesure jugée nécessaire et connait

plusieurs genres de récidive tout a fait distincts.

En tenant compte de la premiere infraction, de sa relation interne

avec la seconde, des critéres résultant du second délit méme, le 1égis-

lateur a la possibilité de fixer les sanctions de la récidive de telle sorte

qu’elles ne seront pas soumises a I’arbitraire du juge, tout en laissant

la marge de souplesse nécessaire pour qu’elles puissent étre adaptées,

dans les limites fixées par la loi, au besoin de chaque cas individuel.

Ainsi la définition juridique aura rempli sa tiche dans le cadre du

droit et c’est le juge chargé d’appliquer la loi qui entre en action dans

un domaine ou il est comparable au médecin; aprés un choix

souverain parmi les moyens a sa disposition il prendra la mesure

nécessaire dans chaque cas individuel pour empécher la récidive.

74

II. — LES STATISTIQUES DE LA RECIDIVE

1

BUTS ET CONDITIONS MATERIELLES

Les statistiques de la récidive ont, dans tous les domaines du droit

pénal, leurs tiches précises. 1l s’agit d’informer le législateur sur les

besoins législatifs et les possibilités qui existent, de renseigner la

judicature sur les chances de succeés des différentes mesures dont le

juge dispose au choix, d’informer I’administration de la justice sur la

mesure dans laquelle la pratique suit les intentions du législateur et

quels sont les succes des mesures prises pour lutter contre la récidive.

Méme pour la police criminelle les statistiques peuvent Etre tres utiles.

Les statistiques sur la récidive seront d’autant plus efficaces que la

documentation de base sera précise. On ne peut arriver a des résultats

utilisables que si les statistiques relatent les infractions initiales et

les secondes infractions dans tous les détails importants pour P'ex-

ploitation.

Ceci n’est possible que si la classification d’un délit comme pre-

miére infraction ou comme récidive n’est pas seulement basée sur les

déclarations du condamné, comme c’est souvent le cas au Canada

(Beausoleil). 11 faut disposer d’un casier judiciaire complet et tenu a

jour pour procéder 3 cette classification. Et on n’y arrivera que si

une législation et une administration sans compromis veillent a ce

que, en effet, toute infraction constatée par 1’autorité soit portée a la

connaissance du service du casier judiciaire.

A cet égard, la situation, comme nous le voyons dans toute une

série de rapports, est encore assez défavorable dans la plupart des

pays. Dans certain pays, comme par exemple en Turquie, il n’y a pas

du tout de statistiques sur la récidive, dans d’autres, comme par

exemple aux Etats-Unis, les tribunaux ne sont pas tenus de faire le

rapport de toute condamnation au casier judiciaire, ou bien, comme

M. Van de Werk le mentionne pour la Hollande et M. Schultz pour

la Suisse, il y a dans la procédure contre les délinquants juvéniles au

lieu d’une condamnation criminelle une mesure de rééducation ou

autre qui n’est pas marquée dans le casier judiciaire.

S’il manque un casier judiciaire central pour tout le pays, les

données seront incomplétes, ce qui constitue un handicap treés con-

sidérable dans I'utilisation des résultats. M. Lodge, en particulier,

s'en plaint en relation avec les statistiques de la ‘“Metropolitan

Police” sur les malfaiteurs c

ondamnés pour la premicre fois de

P’année 1932,

Mais, méme si le service des statistiques dispose d’un casier judi-

75

ciaire central informé avec précision par les tribunaux et qui, grace

a des accords bilatéraux, comme c’est le cas pour 1’Autriche, contient

non seulement les condamnations prononcées dans le pays mais aussi

celles prononcées a ’étranger, on peut rencontrer de sérieuses diffi-

cultés dans ’exploitation scientifique des statistiques parce qu’il y a

I'institution de la réhabilitation. En cas de réhabilitation, en effet,

les condamnations antérieures ne figurent plus dans les renseigne-

ments officiels du casier judiciaire. Pour éviter cette source d’erreurs

il semble indiqué de faire figurer dans les renseignements pour les

statistiques également les antécédents judiciaires déja rayés du casier

judiciaire, comme cela a été fait dans les recherches spéciales que j’ai

effectuées et que je vais encore citer plus loin.

Si une documentation de base aussi compléte n’est pas disponible,

les statistiques sur la récidive ne pourront toujours renseigner que sur

des questions de détail, comme c’est le cas notamment si les statis-

tiques ont pour objet seulement les détenus. Mais méme ces résultats

de détail peuvent donner des renseignements précieux sur certains

domaines, comme le prouvent les statistiques des prisons envoyées

par I’Angleterre (Lodge), L’Israél (Hermon) et I’Afrique du Sud

(Venter).

2

RESULTATS

(a) La criminalité des récidivistes dans le cadre de la criminalité totale.

Les statistiques peuvent jouer un rdle trés important dans la stra-

tégie de la lutte contre la criminalité en montrant 'importance que

revét la lutte contre la récidive dans I’ensemble des mesures prises

pour refréner la criminalité totale. Le résultat des études faites dans

ce sens renseigne non seulement sur les tiches de la prévention

spéciale, mais souligne aussi la fonction des mesures de prévention

générale.

Nous sommes assez bien renseignés sur I'importance de la crimina-

lité récidiviste. La plupart des statistiques officielles font mention du

pourcentage des repris de justice par rapport au nombre total des

condamnés. M. Van Bemmelen, qui a fait des recherches trés pous-

sées sur ce probléme, nous communique que dans les pays européens

qui font ’objet de son étude, il y a en général & peu pres 30 a 359,

des condamnés qui ont déja encouru une condamnation antérieure.

Il signale que ce pourcentage est constant et ne change sensiblement

que sous l'influence de ’accroissement général de la criminalité di

a une guerre.

Comme je I’ai montré dans mon étude sur 'importance de I’armée

de réserve de la criminalité et de la récidive pour la fréquence des

76

crimes,! il arrive dans des périodes de crise qu’un nombre relative-

ment grand d’individus qui, normalement, n’auraient jamais commis

d’infraction, commet des crimes sous I’'influence des conditions de vie

défavorables. Si1, sous I'influence de certaines conditions extérieures,

la criminalité double ou diminue jusqu’a la moitié, il y a pour 9/10

un changement dans le nombre des individus condamnés et pour

1/10 seulement des changements dans 'intensité de I’activité cri-

minelle des malfaiteurs. Se trouve en accord avec cette constatation

Pobservation de M. Van Bemmelen que les chiffres relatifs a la

criminalité des repris de justice sont plus constants que les chiffres

de ceux qui sont condamnés pour la premieére fois.

Un repris de justice n’est pas forcément un criminel habituel. Pour

connaitre le pourcentage des criminels habituels, il faut savoir com-

bien de fois le récidiviste individuel a été condamné. Les rapports de

M. Coffrie pour la Hollande et de M. Lodge pour I’Angleterre sont

tres instructifs a ce sujet. Ils montrent que dans les deux pays les

individus ayant encouru plus de quatre condamnations antérieures

Constituent a peu prés 1/10 jusqu’a 1/5 de tous les malfaiteurs con-

amnes pour des infractions graves. Il y a des différences assez re-

marquables e

n ce qui concerne la nature de I'infraction. Les con-

d

amnés pour vagabondage, mendicité et vol ont, en général, le plus

grand nombre de condamnations antérieures. Pour ce genre de délits,

la tendance 2 la récidive est la plus forte. M. Schultz pour la Suisse et

M. Sellin pour 1e

s Etats-Unis arrivent a des résultats un peu différents.

On peut examiner Je probléme sous un autre aspect encore et ne

pas relever le nombre de condamnés dans une année mais chercher

a établir combien de personnes parmi la population totale sont a

considérer comme criminels habituels. Dans une étude spéciale

que jai faite pour 'année 1937 (voir Kriminalpolitische Probleme,

P- 114) j°ai trouvé qu’il y avait dans I’ Autriche d’avant-guerre, sur

100.000 personnes du sexe masculin et ayant atteint la majorité

pénale, 908 voleurs habituels, 121 cambrioleurs habituels, 454 escrocs

habituels et 517 habituels de 1a rixe.

(b) Le réle des ““criminels accidentels”.

Pour ’application des différentes formes de la remise de peine con-

ditionnel

le, il importe surtout de savoir dans quelle mesure les crimes

commis sont le fait d’un “‘criminel accidentel”

duquel il n’y a pas

de récidive 3 craindre.

! Die Lésu

solution d

ng kr iminalpolitischer Probleme durch die mechanische Statistik. (La

€ certains problémes d

¢ la politique criminelle par les statistiques

mécaniques.) 193 pages e

t un résumé en anglais, en frangais et en russe, Editions

Springer, Vienne, 1946,

77

On ne saurait répondre a cette question par une enquéte rétrospec-

tive qui ne fait qu’enregistrer combien d’individus parmi les con-

damnés dans I’époque donnée avaient des condamnations antérieures,

mais il faut étudier la vie de I'individu une fois condamné aprés cette

premiére condamnation. Mme et M. Glueck, aux Etats-Unis, ont fait

de telles recherches. Une étude que j’ai faite moi-méme a I’aide de la

documentation sur 30.000 individus du sexe masculin condamnés

dans la période entre les deux guerres mondiales a montré (Krimi-

nalpolitische Probleme p. 65 ff.) que parmi les individus condamnés

pour la premiére fois pour un délit contre la propriété, 409, n’ont

plus encouru de condamnations apres. Parmi ceux condamnés pour

crime ou délit contre les personnes, il n’y efit méme que la moitié qui

ont récidive.

Ces chiffres montrent déja quelle est 'importance capitale de la

remise de peine conditionnelle dans le cas de la premiére condamna-

tion. Et, en outre, le fait d’une récidive ne prouve nullement que

I’infraction soit plus qu’un épisode. Ce n’est pas tellement le nombre

des condamnations au total qui compte que l’intervalle dans lequel

elles se suivent. Ainsi, par exemple, selon ma documentation sur les

individus condamnés de 1919 a 1923 pour la premiere fois pour vol,

il y elit 449, qui n’ont pas encouru d’autre condamnation dans les

14 années suivantes, 209, ont commis un second délit, 109, ont

commis deux délits encore. 369, seulement ont été condamnés

encore quatre fois ou plus dans le délai de 14 ans et ce sont ceux-1a

qu’on pourra presque tous qualifier de récidivistes chroniques.

Dans les 10 années apres la premiére condamnation de leur vie, il y

eut selon cette méme étude 429, parmi ceux condamnés pour rixe,

459, de ceux condamnés pour abus de confiance, 46%, des voleurs

et 519, des escrocs qui ont récidivé. Etant donné que, comme le

constate M. Van Bemmelen, la tendance a la récidive est beaucoup

plus faible chez la femme que chez I’homme, le sursis et la libération

conditionnelle devraient €tre encore plus largement appliqués pour

elles.

(¢) La dynamique de la récidive.

Si les travaux anciens dans le domaine des statistiques de la réci-

dive, notamment sous I'influence des assemblées générales de I’Union,

tenues en 1893 a Paris et en 1894 & Anvers, et en raison des proposi-

tions de Kobner, se sont bornées surtout au simple enregistrement

des faits de la récidive, nous sommes arrivés maintenant, surtout

d’aprés le bon exemple des ‘“‘Prediction studies” américains, & une

maniére de voir plutét dynamique qui met au premier plan l'inter-

valle dans la récidive et 1a tendance de ’activité criminelle ultérieure.

78

Ces travaux nous montrent en particulier la grande importance de la

criminalité précoce sur laquelle ’expert suisse en droit pénal et en

criminologie, M. Erwin Frey, a fait une étude particuliecrement

1nstructive.?

Les éléments essentiels pour juger la dynamique de la récidive se

résument bri¢vement par la formule suivante:

Le crime est le résultat des prédispositions et du milieu. Plus sera

forte la prédisposition au crime chez I'individu, plus facilement elle

se manifestera dans sa vie. Il y a par conséquent parmi les personnes

qui commettent une infraction dans I’dge de I’adolescence un bien

plus grand pourcentage d’individus a forte prédisposition au crime

que parmi ceux qui ne commettent le premier délit que plus tard dans

leur vie. Et tout comme les individus & grave prédisposition criminelle

deviennent malfaiteurs plus t6t que ceux dont la prédisposition

asociale est moins forte, de méme les individus a forte disposition

au crime récidivent plus vite que les autres. A la criminalité adoles-

cente vient s’ajouter I'intervalle trés bref dans la récidive comme autre

indice de la prédisposition criminelle.

60

50%

40%

4

30%

20

=

0%

7

2 3

4

> 6 7% & 9 1w

Fig. 1

Ces constatations se

trouvent remarquablement confirmées dans

les diagrammes de 13 f;

A

lep

gure 1 qui montrent, selon les groupes d’

age,

ourcentage des voleurs récidivistes avant la fin des années suivant

la premiére condamnati

observations faites sur

on. Les courbes reproduites ici résultent des

4.239 hommes condamnés pour la premiére

" Der frithkriminelle Riickfallsverbrecher. Editions

““Verlag fiir Recht und

Gesellschaft”. Bile, 1951.

79

fois pour vol en Autriche dans les années 1919-1923 et 1927-1931.

Dans mon étude sur la solution de certains problémes de la lutte

contre la criminalité par les statistiques mécaniques que j’ai déja men-

tionnée plusieurs fois, j’ai expliqué les raisons pour lesquelles les

courbes résultant des observations de la récidive se rapprochent de la

parabole, de sorte qu’on peut caractériser dans ’examen d’un trés

grand nombre d’individus leur récidive de fagon purement mathé-

matique, par le paramétre qui caractérise justement cette parabole.

J’ai nommé ce paramétre “la constante de la récidive”. Elle est une

mesure trés exacte pour I’étendue et la vitesse avec laquelle se produit

la récidive et elle indique combien parmi les personnes observées

deviennent récidivistes dans les premiers douze mois aprés I’expira-

tion de leur peine.

A T’aide d’une documentation sur 2.895 voleurs condamnés pour

la premiére fois dans leur vie dans les années 1919-1923 on a pu

constater que, dés la premiére infraction, cette constante de la réci-

dive permet de distinguer les criminels chroniques avec plus de 7

condamnations dans 14 ans de ceux qui ne sont condamnés que 2 ou

3 fois dans 1a méme période. Les valeurs constatées pour la constante

de la récidive sont les suivantes:

avec

2

condamnations dans 14 années 14,86%, dans la premiére année

avece

3

condamnations dans 14 années 17,05%, dans la premiére année

avec

4—5 condamnations dans 14 années 19,56%, dans la premiére année

avec

6—7 condamnations dans 14 années 24,159, dans la premiére année

avec pl. d. 7 condamnations dans 14 années 25,109, dans la premiére année

Les valeurs trouvées ici pour I’ Autriche sont plus favorables que

celles communiquées par M. Vinter pour I’Afrique du Sud; dans ce

pays, en effet, il y a parmi les personnes libérées apres la cinquiéme

condamnation 70%, qui récidivent, dont 829, dans les premiers

douze mois aprés la libération.

Les enquétes faites sur la dynamique de la récidive ont montré en

outre que la question de savoir si quelqu’un a tendance a la récidive

ou non se décide dans les premiéres années apreés sa condamnation.

Si quelqu’un n’a pas encouru d’autre condamnation pendant dix ans,

une nouvelle infraction aprés ce délai ne saurait guére étre con-

sidérée comme leffet de défauts caractériels manifestés dans la

premiére infraction. L’institution de la prescription de la récidive

mentionnée au début a donc son bien-fondé.

Ceci se trouve également confirmé par les recherches importantes

faites en Norvege sur lesquelles nous renseigne M. Christie. Parmi les

détenus libérés dans les années 1923-1926, 22,19, ont récidivé dans

3 ans. En prolongeant le temps d’observation a 10 ans, on a vu que

les nouveaux récidivistes se chiffraient seulement & 5,99,.

80

Etant donné que selon mes observations, la criminalité habituelle

se manifeste dans 819, des cas dans les 5 années qui suivent la

premiére condamnation, le délai de 5 ans fixé dans de nombreux

codes comme condition de la relégation ou de la peine particuli¢re-

ment sévere pour la récidive est tres juste.

(d) Peine et récidive.

Presque tous les codes modernes obligent le juge a tenir compte

des condamnations antérieures. Pourtant, dans la pratique, la déci-

sion se fait beaucoup plus souvent sous I'impression de la derniere

infraction que d’apres les antécédents judiciaires. Dans de nombreux

rapports on s’en plaint sans pouvoir fournir des données statistiques

DeA”

220

200

Pl

50

100

ZI\

N

=T 1

14

2 3 4 5 ¢

7 &8 9 ©

Fig. 2

h

précises

a

ce sujet. Dans mon étude mentionée plus haut, sur la

Situation en Autriche, j’ai traité ce probléme dans un chapitre entier

(pages 104-114). Je voudrais en reproduire la fig. 2 particuliérement

caractéristique, qui montre dans la verticale les peines prononcées

Par jours et dans I’horizontale combien de fois I'individu en question

a €té condamné en

le vol

tout. Le graphique montre que ce n’est que pour

qu’il est tenu compte des condamnations antérieures. La

premié

re condamnation es

t en genéral de 50 jours, la dixiéme de

210 jours de prison. Cette

raisons.

position A part du vol s’explique par deux

Selon le code pénal autrichien le vol est considéré crime, sans

¢gard a la somme volée, et entraine par cons€quent une peine plus

severe si le condamné a déja encouru deux condamnations pour vol et

81

CC-F

s’il ne s’est pas encore écoulé le délai de 5 ans depuis ’expiration de

la derniére peine. Dans ce cas, il est donc obligatoire d’élever la peine.

Pour les autres délits, le juge ne doit tenir compte de la récidive qu’a

titre de circonstance aggravante dans le cadre de la peine portée par

la loi. Cet exemple montre combien il est important de prévoir dans

le code des aggravations obligatoires de la peine comme cela s’est fait

en Turquie d’une fagon trés détaillée (rapport de M. Goziibiiyiik).

La deuxiéme raison pour laquelle on tient tout particuliérement

compte de la récidive pour le vol seulement est de nature psycholo-

gique et résulte du fait que tout le monde, méme le juge, se sent

menacé par le voleur. Quand il s’agit de punir la fraude ou la rixe,

par contre, il y a souvent au premier plan 'idée que le préjudicié

aurait di se retirer prudemment et & temps de I’entreprise dangereuse

et s’il ne I’a pas fait, c’est un peu de sa faute.

(e) Le succés de la peine prononcée.

Des statistiques exactes sur les résultats de la peine infligée ne

sont guére possibles en général. En effet, le succés ne dépend pas

seulement du travail de réadaptation fait par I'exécution de la peine,

mais aussi de la personnalité¢ des condamnés eux-mémes. La statis-

tique sur les résultats par conséquent n’a qu’une importance locale

et ne saura guere faire ’objet d’'une comparaison sur 1’échelle inter-

nationale.

Elle est particuli¢erement importante partout ot il y eut libération

conditionnelle parce que la valeur de cette institution trés importante

dépend essentiellement de la fagon dont elle est appliquée. Rien ne

serait plus dangereux que de retourner en quelque sorte au vieux

syst¢éme du pilori en renongant a toute peine dans tous les cas d’une

premiére infraction. Le principe ‘“‘une fois n’est pas coutume”

pourrait devenir trés dangereux pour la jeunesse.

Parmi les individus condamnés avec sursis en Suisse, selon le rap-

port de M. SCHULTZ, il y eut environ 809, qui ont pu profiter du

sursis, 209, étaient récidivistes. Les résultats de la libération condi-

tionnelle sont moins bons en général, ce qui s’explique certainement

en partie par le fait que les individus condamnés effectivement & une

peine de prison avaient tout particuliérement besoin d’une rééduca-

tion. Selon une statistique sur laquelle nous informe M. SELLIN, il y

eut parmi les individus libérés conditionnellement (Parolees) en 1948

des prisons de New York 559, de récidivistes avant la fin de

I’année 1952.

Ceux qui réclament toujours de nouveau la peine capitale auraient

intérét & prendre connaissance du fait (c’est le mérite de M. CHRISTIE

de I’avoir retenu) qu’au XX si¢cle en Norvége personne ne récidiva

82

pour meurtre, bien que les assassins condamnés a la prison perpé-

tuelle sont libérés en Norvége en moyenne apres 10 ou 12 ans.

(f) L’étude de la carriere criminelle.

Des études modernes, faites notamment pour établir des tableaux

de pronostics, ont cherché & retracer la carriere typique pour cer-

taines catégories de criminels. De telles recherches, mentionnées

surtout dans les sections 2-4, sont d’une trés grande valeur pour le

travail pratique de la police criminelle parce qu’elles renseignent sur

le réservoir et I’avenir des criminels habituels.

Elles montrent que la plupart des malfaiteurs professionnels sui-

vent une évolution qui les conduit du délit plutot général vers une

asocialité plus spécialisée. A ce sujet nous pouvons distinguer les

formes fondamentales de criminalité initiale, de criminalité de transi-

tion et de criminalité définitive. Ainsi par exemple le vol simple ouvre

la carriére du cambrioleur, mais il joue aussi un certain role dans les

débuts de la carriére de 1’escroc. Le vol est un délit initial typique.

Le diagramme de la figure 3 montre la carriere criminelle de

1.012 malfaiteurs habituels condamnés au moins 7 fois, dont 3 fois

au moins pour vol. Plus le nombre des condamnations augmente,

Plus le vol simple se fait rare pour étre remplacé par des délits contre

la propriété plus spécialisés. Les individus actifs s’engagent dans le

cambriolage et dans la fraude, les passifs en viennent aux petits délits

du vagabondage. Le déséquilibre psychique augmente avec le nombre

des condamnations antérieures et se traduit par un accroissement

des crimes de violence.

Une autre forme de représentation est trés instructive en ce qu’elle

montre 1’Age caractéristique des différentes phases dans la carriére

criminelle. La figure 4, tirée du livre de PADOWETZ L’escroquerie

au mariage' en donne un exemple. Elle montre que la fraude con-

stitue la phase finale d’une évolution criminelle dans laquelle 1’es-

croquerie au mariage n’est qu’une phase transitoire pendant ’age

ou le malfaiteur est le plus susceptible d’avoir du succés.

Pour le policier ces recherches ont une grande valeur parce qu’elles

lui montrent dans quelles catégories de malfaiteurs il doit chercher

un criminel

qui n’est pas encore signalé dans son fichier sous le

modu

§ operandi qu’il pratique pour le moment.

Le pourcentage des r

e

C’est un des buts

Pris de justice par rapport a la population totale.

les plus anciens des statistiques criminelles de

pouvoir chiffrer le n

ombre des repris de justice dans la population.

On a besoin de ce chiffre non seulement pour juger du danger qui

1 Editions Springer, Vienne, 1954,

83

77

N

3713_:;§

W

<4

G

vber20

3467

77-20

21N

9376

E\lV8v /9 &\\\

7-70

av

336

Vol =]

By

&

74

43

J80

4353 B

Bv

re

73

496

[’Z:

2

/B8

V44

J78

14

-

ry

17

678

E

By 7/

0

R

Vg

765

2 F1/ By

Vg

877

nfo)

S\ Bv

e A e ———————

-

7072

By

7072

1 £ Wov

V3l 7214

7072

4

7072

£ Nbv

Y E NSNS EYEYEYEYENENINAN

:Eq

0

A4

7072

LY N PR E

7072

/4

1% U

6NA |2

==

By Vo 6

A |7

0 20 30 40 50 60

7 80 90 700%

Fig. 3

menace la société du fait que des malfaiteurs vivent dans la popu-

lation, mais 1l est 4 beaucoup d’égards la condition absolue d’une in-

terprétation scientifique des données réunies dans d’autres domaines

sur les condamnations antérieures. Il faut savoir par exemple com-

bien de personnes en moyenne ont des condamnations antérieures

pour pouvoir juger si les malfaiteurs qui font I’objet d’une analyse

ont une ascendance criminelle au-dessus de la moyenne

Toutes les études de ce genre, naturellement, n’ont d’importance

que pour la région dans laquelle elles ont été faites. Cela s’explique

par le fait que les différents codes donnent une définition différente

du crime et que les infractions ne sont pas jugées partout selon les

84

lerzte Strafiillighert

458273

Jetetes Vermogensdelikt

4782737

lerzter Belryg

SODEASS.

-

427273

44

sasass

J72 72

Jerzter Hewrafsschwinae/

erster KHerratsschwinagel/

F67 277

sicis

aw |

b+

Eeeses

JC2TL70

erster Befrug

2472270

ersres Vc’rmoyeﬂ.m’f//%/

erste S frafj///yie’/f

229270

Fig. 4

mémes principes. En Autriche, par exemple, tout acte susceptible de

mettre en danger la sécurité corporelle d’autrui entraine une peine,

méme s’il n’a pas causé de blessures. En outre, toutes les condamna-

tions, méme celles pour grivelerie, sont marquées dans le casier judi-

ciaire, par conséquent il doit y avoir en Autriche un nombre beau-

coup plus ¢€levé de repris de justice que dans les pays ot seulement

les “indictables offences’ sont marquées au casier judiciaire.

85

FINKELNBURG a publié en 1912 son étude sur le nombre des repris

de justice en Allemagne. Depuis on a fait de nombreuses tentatives

du méme genre. Mais M. LODGE seulement, parmi tous ceux qui ont

envoyé des rapports, s’occupe de cette question. Selon ses évalua-

tions il y a en Angleterre environ 33.000 individus au-dessus de 21

ans qui ont purgé plus de quatre fois une peine privative de liberté

pour “‘indictable offences™.

Dans mon étude mentionnée plus haut j’ai cherché a établir com-

bien de personnes, en 1937, avaient encouru des condamnations

antérieures en Autriche pour une infraction donnée. Sur la popula-

tion masculine ayant atteint la majorité pénale il y avait par exemple

sur 100.000 individus 25 condamnés pour vol 3 main armée, 43 pour

viol authentique (common law rape), 8.636 pour coups et blessures

volontaires, 8.974 pour vol, 1.636 pour cambriolage, 3.137 pour

escroquerie et 15 pour infractions a la 1égislation sur les stupéfiants.

Comme la question des condamnations antérieures dépend égale-

ment de ’Age de I'individu — dans certains domaines il y a une cri-

minalité de vieillesse marquée — on a parfois besoin de données

précises sur le nombre des repris de justice dans certains groupes

d’age. Ce n’est que par un travail de détail trés patient qu’on peut

arriver a des résultats dans ce sens et, a ce que je sache, il n’y a pas

encore de publication dans ce domaine. A la fin de I’année 1951 j’ai

établi un tableau sur les condamnés pour attentat aux meeurs qui

vivent en Autriche (voir figure 5).

A peine une telle étude est-elle faite que de nouvelles questions se

posent, par exemple celle de la relation entre les centres urbains et la

campagne. En effet, il y a des différences trés marquées a ce sujet,

ce qui a été souligné par MM. COFFRIE, CHRISTIE et HERMON. 1l y

a des différences énormes pour ce qui est de la population trés

fluctuante de I'Israél: 89, des récidivistes seulement viennent du

village dans ce pays!

III. — CONCLUSIONS

Ce bref tour d’horizon des statistiques de la récidive a montré

quelles tiches importantes elles ont & remplir et quels résultats pra-

tiques on peut en attendre si elles sont soigneusement établies et

réunies avec une trés grande précision. La condition sine qua non

pour toute statistique sur la récidive est un casier judiciaire qui

fonctionne parfaitement et ’observation selon un plan judicieux qui

ne sera pas seulement rétrospective, centrée sur le passé du mal-

86

Vorbestrafie s,»wzﬁkmrém:r i Jsterreich

SesamMer/

|

s

Z

/

730

720

m

MiBbrouch

wnANinoem

70

2 Schindumg

70.000 der Bevilkerung

e

Serali

/ //

Verurterlite oot

w/////

///

lo/z:di/

Unechle

Nolzucht

” el

Beshialitst

| Lehte Notzucht

2 ¥ XN B & &

v S & &

Aller

Fig. 5

faiteur, mais qui suivra aussi le condamné dans sa vie aprés la con-

damnation, comme c’est prévu en Suéde par le projet présenté par

M. RENGBY.

A coté de la statistique criminelle courante qui doit servir I’admi-

nistration et qui par conséquent ne peut retenir que quelques données

sur la documentation immense a exploiter, des études spéciales sont

indispensables qui se borneront 4 un ensemble de questions bien déli-

mitées, mais qui examineront en détail chaque cas individuel et ses

caractéristiques. Ce sont ces études spéciales qui ouvrent de nouveaux

horizons, pour la pratique aussi bien que pour la science, et qui con-

stituent ainsi le germe du progrés vers un avenir plus heureux de

I’humanité.

87

SECTION II

THE FORMS OF RECIDIVISM

by Walter C. Reckless

It is indeed an honour to be associated with the distinguished

members of Section 2 of the Third International Congress on Cri-

minology. As one of the General Rapporteurs, I have received help

and inspiration from my associate, Dr. C. H. Andersen (Belgium),

and from very important papers contributed by Dr. John Spencer

(U.K.), Prof. Dr. Ernst Seelig and Dozent Dr. Hans Bellavic

(Austria), Prof. Dr. H. J. Venter (South Africa), Prof. Dr. Valdés

Santo Tomas (Cuba), Prof. Enrico Altavilla (Italy). In addition, a

report was presented by La Federation Internationale des Fonction-

naires Supérieurs de Police and a case history of a youthful recidivist

submitted by Dr. W. H. Nagel (Netherlands).

Recidivism has been studied mainly by the use of available statis-

tics of convictions in courts and admissions to penal and correctional

institutions. The notable exception to this has been the elaborate

investigations by the Gluecks, who studied what happened to

offenders after they were released from institutions. Several re-

searchers have observed the outcome of small numbers of offenders

who were subjected to a certain kind of treatment or therapy. Much

valuable information and many important clues regarding the nature

of recidivism have come from all these studies.

THE NEED FOR CASE HISTORIES

However, it has not been possible to obtain a systematic descrip-

tion of the patterns of recidivism. Many criminologists hold the view

that recidivism must be studied from the standpoint of the life

organisation and personality development of the individual rather

than from the standpoint of the number of convictions and the

official relapses after release from prison. This does not mean that

statistical studies, which attempt to establish certain facts about

repeaters, should not go forward. It merely means that, accompany-

ing the progress of statistical researches, a systematic collection of

case histories must be made and that these systematically collected

case histories must be analysed.

Since patterns of recidivism must be deduced from the qualitative

88

analysis of various samples of case histories of repeated offenders,

one of the important considerations is the need to develop a standard

outline which can be used by criminologists in the collection of scien-

tifically adequate information in a case history.

I

Consequently, the first question which should be discussed in this

section is whether a standard outline should be developed and

used, for the systematic collection of case histories of recidivists?

Since criminologists have varied training and experience, it occurs

to the writer that a ‘““team approach” would be a very good thing to

use in the systematic collection of data in case histories. The gather-

ing of information in case histories and the analysis of case histories

would be the collective work of a team of criminologists. The findings

of such a research team would carry more scientific weight than the

work of a single researcher or a group of researchers at an institute

who have similar training and use similar methods of research.

II

Should criminologists develop research teams, representing several

methods and approaches, for making a systematic collection of

case histories of recidivists?

Two important questions are closely connected with the two ques-

tions above and I believe the honourable members of this section

should exchange views on them:

III. What constitutes an adequate sample of case histories which can

give authority and validity to the findings of criminologists?

IV. What are the case-history criteria of a recidivist?

In expanding question IV, we might re-state it to ask: When do

we have in a case history a definite pattern of recidivism? Obviously,

there is considerable dissatisfaction with the legal criterion of reci-

divism which is used today, namely that a recidivist is a person who

has been convicted two or more times.

THE CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING PATTERNS

OF RECIDIVISM

Assuming that future research will produce adequate samples of

adequately collected case histories, and that some practical basis will

be found for separating the recidivists from the nonrecidivists, what

are the best criteria to use in identifying and distinguishing the

principal forms of recidivism? The writer proposes that the honour-

able members of the section consider the use of the following two

criteria:

89

(1) the meaning or function of the recidivistic behaviour in the

individual case history.

(2) the dominant etiological factor in the individual case history.

The writer’s research experience leads him to suggest that, from

the standpoint of function or meaning of the recidivistic behaviour,

there are patterns of recidivism which definitely represent (a) a cri-

minal career, vocation, or trade and (b) there are patterns of reci-

divism, representing the uncontrollable repetition of criminal acts,

which do not take the form of a career or trade but are merely the

behaviour of habitual and abnormal delinquents and criminals.

In group (a) we have individuals who are making their living or

part of their living from crime. These individuals have a gainful

criminal occupation. They usually concentrate in property crimes,

although they may do violence to victims incidental to the carrying

out of the deed. These recidivists, as a result of their experiences,

acquire criminal techniques, habits, and attitudes. The recidivists in

group (b) do not commit crimes as gainful employment but rather

commit them because they cannot control what they do (their internal

self-control is weak or breaks down under tension and impulse).

Obviously, there are sociological, psychological, constitutional,

and pathological causes for recidivism. In the classification of forms

of recidivists according to a dominant etiological factor which is

present in the case history, we notice that all the patterns of recidi-

vism which emerge from sociological causes come under group (a),

namely criminal careers or trades, and we notice that the patterns of

recidivism which emerge from a dominating psychological, consti-

tutional, or pathological factor (with one exception) come under

group (b), namely, the habitual and abnormal criminals. The excep-

tion is the physically handicapped individual who gravitates to crime

to make a living. (See pattern (a) 6 below).

THE PRINCIPAL PATTERNS OF RECIDIVISM

Having in mind a global perspective (which is difficult for any

criminologist to have), the writer proposes the following classifica-

tion of patterns of recidivists, based on the function of the behaviour

and dominant etiological factor.

(a) Criminal Careers, Vocations, or Trades:

1. The ordinary criminal career, involving a mixture of gainful

property crimes such as thieving, robbing, burglarising, etc.

Such careers have emerged out of bad environments, social

and economic inadequacies, bad companions, criminal asso-

90

ciates, stigma of society, development of criminal attitudes

and techniques, lack of opportunity or help in settling down.

This pattern of recidivism is by far the most frequent of all

types of recidivists, within the writer’s experience.

The criminal trades of a special group tradition, such as the

criminal tribes of India, the illegal manufacture of whisky

(““moonshiners”) in the United States, gypsies, etc. The

recidivist falling in this pattern acquires his criminal pur-

suits as a perfectly normal member of his special social

group.

Organised criminals, such as American gangsters and

racketeers, traffickers in women and girls, drug traffickers,

smugglers, operators of fences for stolen goods, etc. The

frequency of this pattern of recidivism should vary with

countries, depending on conditions and traditions which

enable it to survive. However, we should not expect to find

very many organised criminals in jails and prisons. If they

are to be studied, some method for contacting them pri-

vately will have to be used. Some forms of smuggling in

certain parts of the world partake more of the nature of

pattern 2 than of pattern 3. At any rate, the recidivists in

pattern 3 follow the route of those in pattern 1 until they

make connection with definitely organised criminal enter-

prise.

Professional criminal careers, such as confidence men,

forgers, counterfeiters, gem thieves, art forgers, etc. These

persons have developed the highest skills in non-violent

crimes. They have not emerged out of pattern 1 but rather

have a middle class and upper class origin. They have de-

veloped a misuse of their skills, training, and education as

a result of contact with other professionals. They look

down on the amateurs of pattern 1 and hold themselves

aloof from contact with ordinary criminals. They manage

to avoid detection. Very few of them get to jails and prisons.

They move in entirely different circles than recidivists of all

the previous patterns.

The white-collar criminals are violators of positions of trust

and governmental controls. They are business men, profes-

sional men (physicians, lawyers, etc.), and government

employees. In America, E. H. Sutherland was the first cri-

minologist to call attention to the criminal practices of

these middle and upper class persons, most of whom are

able to remain free of the courts and prisons. The criminal

91

practices are a part of a larger tradition of sharp, unscrupu-

lous practices. The opportunity and the inspiration to be a

repeater in “white-collar crime” comes from the peculiar

position of financial trust (dealing with money and property

of others), the lure of great gains at little risk, the example

set by dishonest and unscrupulous colleagues, the failure to

get caught, etc. Here again, as in the instance of pattern 3,

the frequency of pattern 5 will depend on the particular

development of business, the professions, and government

service in various countries.

The physically handicapped person, such as the blind, de-

formed, impaired (loss of limb), etc., who gravitates to

criminal or pseudo criminal pursuits. He is driven into

crime by a sense of inferiority or lack of opportunity to

make an honest living. He is a product of rejection by

society.

(b) Habitual and Abnormal Offenders:

7. Anti-social character. This group includes individuals who

repeat in crime and/or reject their social and economic

obligations, often gravitate to alcoholism, drug addiction,

vagabondage, and frequently become sexual deviates. They

display a weak ego structure and weak internal controls

over their impulsivity. They display very little super ego

(conscience), very little sympathy for others, very little

capacity to identify with persons. They often are aggressive,

hostile, immature, and unstable. They are quite egocentric.

This group includes the so-called psychopaths. Some

authorities stress the psychogenic development of anti-

social character formation in the early years of life (due to

rejection). Others stress the inheritance of weaknesses in

character. Nevertheless, recidivists originating from anti-

social character appear to be the most frequent of recidivists

within the habitual and abnormal group and are the next

most frequent to the recidivists classified under ordinary

criminal careers.

Psychoneurotic delinquents and criminals, usually acting

from compulsion, such as kleptomania, compulsive fireset-

ting, compulsive murder; but sometimes acting from anxiety

tensions and reverting to voyeurism, exhibitionism, homo-

sexuality. Sometimes also the break-through of internal

controls is so painful unconsciously that the anxiety-ridden

neurotic who has acted out in a criminal way develops tem-

92

porary amnesia. Most neurotic individuals do not act out

their symptoms. It seems as if the internal controls are

strong enough to force the tensions of psychic conflict to get

discharged in illnesses and worries. The psychoneurotic

offender does not want to be criminal. Criminal break-

through increases the neurotic’s anxiety but at the same time

discharges his more basic tensions

Habitual delinquents and criminals due to some pathologi-

cal condition such as epilepsy, postencephalitis, brain in-

jury, brain tumour, etc. Such persons may often be confused

with individuals falling in pattern 7. They frequently display

uncontrollable tempers, hostility, cruelty, impulsivity, and

the inability to take the ordinary pressures and demands of

society. It is hoped that good clinical diagnosis as well as the

use of the electroencephalogram will help distinguish them

from persons of anti-social character development. Such

persons are rare and still rarer are the recidivists who

originate from these pathological conditions

10

Abnormal recidivists due to psychosis or mental deficiency

We should expect that the overwhelming majority of men-

tally deficient persons and psychotic persons would get

involved in delinquency or crime. Few do, however. And

still fewer repeat in crime

The writer does not propose acceptance of this list of patterns of

recidivists. Certainly, additions and modifications will be offered in

discussion. It is certainly true that any list proposed at this time might

not have as much application in one country as in another, in one

part of the world as in another part of the world, or in under-

developed countries as in highly developed countries

However, the rapporteur asks the honourable members of this

section to discuss the question

V. Should we accept the principle of identifying and distinguishing

the principal forms of recidivism according to function (mean-

ing) of the behaviour and dominant etiological factor as shown

in the case history of each recidivist? If not, should some other

criteria for identifying forms of recidivism be used?

SECONDARY COMPONENTS

The rapporteur is well aware of the merits of identifying patterns

of recidivism according to other criteria, as for example the potential

93

danger of the criminal to society, prognosis and treatability, specifi-

city in criminal activity, etc. It seems to the writer that such items

should be considered as secondary components of recidivism,

because they are not always readily established by the available in-

formation in each case history. However, since many of these secon-

dary components have been considered very important, a list of them

has been prepared. All of us desire to have criminological research in

the future add to our knowledge of the operation of these com-

ponents in individual cases. At present, we do not have sufficient

information from individual case histories or from statistical studies

to relate these secondary components to various types of recidivists.

The list of secondary components of recidivism is as follows: (some

of them overlap).

age of onset of recidivism.

socio-economic class origins of recidivists.

sex differential in recidivism.

concept of self as criminal.

degree of specificity.

preventability.

the factor of maturation.

%

prognosis and treatability.

potential danger of recidivist to society.

10

age at settling down or levelling off.

11

response to extramural treatment (probation and aftercare).

12

response to psychotherapy.

13

need for long-term institutionalisation.

The honourable members of the section might address themselves

to the question:

VI. What revisions in and additions to the list of components of reci-

divism should be made at this time, so that future research can

relate the components of recidivism to the forms of recidivism?

A CENTRAL FOCUS FOR ALL CRIMINOLOGISTS

Since criminologists represent several scientific disciplines and

bring to criminological research a wide variety of theories, training,

experience, and methods, it appears to the rapporteur that crimino-

logists should develop a central theme of study which gives perspec-

tive, meaning, and significance to all contributions.

I propose that we think of criminal behaviour and recidivism as

observable points somewhere along a continuum of socially accept-

94

able conduct, or conversely along a line of social deviation (unaccept-

able behaviour). An individual at any given time in his life history has

capacity or incapacity for playing acceptable roles in society. If he

behaves in acceptable ways, he is a socialised person who displays

capacity to play the proper roles in life. If he behaves in deviant ways,

he is an asocialised person who displays incapacity or deficiency in

playing acceptable roles in life. A person might possess the incapacity

to be a socialised person (hence an asocialised individual) from ex-

perience, adverse social training, biological weaknesses, acquired

character deficiencies, or pathological conditions. Due to the com-

ponents which have contributed to his socialisation or asocialisation

(to his capacity or incapacity to play acceptable roles in life), an in-

dividual may be a saint upon earth, a very conventional person, a

good citizen, a wayward person, a delinquent, a recidivist, or an un-

controllable deviate. He might have expectancy to maintain his posi-

tion on the continuum of socially acceptable behaviour or he might

have expectancy to improve or retrogress, according to the inter-

action of the components of his personality with the demands of his

immediate social environment.

With this frame of reference, the criminologists of sociological

training, legal training, anthropological training, or psychiatric train-

ing can contribute to a central theme, namely what produces inca-

pacity for playing acceptable roles in life. Assuming that some of us

have a primary interest in the study of response to treatment, we can

also contribute to the central theme, because we would be attempting

to test and improve the delinquent’s capacity for socialisation. As-

suming that our interest is in prevention, we would be attempting to

discover and use measures which would keep certain individuals from

developing incapacity for socialisation.

Eventually, the degree of capacity or incapacity for socialisation

will have to be measured on a scale of socialisation. A very brilliant

American psychologist, Dr. Harrison G. Gough! of the University

! Dr. Harrison G. Gough, Department of Psychology, University of Cali-

fornia, Berkeley, California, developed a special psychological test, called the

“De scale” (delinquency scale), which is part of a much larger series of tests that

measure the way an individual handles or confronts himself in his interpersonal

environment. The larger series of tests is called The California Psychological

Inventory, copyright, 1951. The De scale originally consisted of 64 items but

now consists of 54 items, which can be answered true or false (yes or no). The

answers have been proven to be scientifically discriminal and distinguishing

individuals who stand at known places along a continuum of socialisation-

asocialisation, as demonstrated by the results of tests administered to hundreds

of individuals in various graded samples, such as “good citizens’’, disciplinary

cases (rule violators) in American high schools, violators of the code of the

95

of California, has already made a beginning in this direction and has

developed a scale which, in America, scientifically and reliably mea-

sures the individual’s tendency towards delinquency, as a part of his

1ncapacity to play socially acceptable roles in life (his asocialisation)

I take great pleasure in recognising Dr. Gough’s work and in sug-

gesting that criminologists consider adopting as our central theme of

reference the incapacity to play acceptable roles in life (deficiency in

socialisation)

SUMMARY OF PAPERS CONTRIBUTED TO SECTION

(Presented in the sequence in which they were received)

My distinguished colleague, Dr. C. H. Andersen (Belgium), indicates

that the legal definition of recidivism is not a satisfactory one and that

the forms of recidivism should be based upon etiological factors. You

have undoubtedly received his classification of non-recidivist delin-

quents and recidivist delinquents as well as his classification of etio-

logical factors

Dr. John Spencer (U.K.) states that the recidivist falls in a hier-

archy extending from the second offender at the bottom to profes-

sional criminal at the top. The habitual offender would occupy an

intermediate position. He questions the universality of specificity in

recidivism. He also points out that very little study has been made of

female recidivism. He finds it difficult to establish an age progression

in recidivism from petty to serious crimes. He discovers that, in the

lamentable absence of sociological studies on recidivists, the typology

U.S. Navy, juvenile delinquents, and adult prisoners. Here are some examples

of the 54 items in the De scale, the answer in parentheses indicating the direction

towards delinquency: a. Before I do something I try to consider how my friends

will react to it (false). b. I often think about how I look and what impression

I am making upon others (false). c. I would rather go without something than

ask for a favour (true). d. When I work at something I like to read and study

about it (true). Of course, questions such as these would have to be modified

and changed for different countries but it is quite likely that an appropriate

De (delinquency) scale, to measure the degree of asocialisation,could be developed

for other countries. Dr. Gough found that the mean scores for the various

samples listed above progressed significantly from low to high. This was true

for both the male as well as the female samples. See ‘A Sociological Theory of

Psychopathy,” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 53, 194748, pp. 359-366

“The Identification and Measurement of Predispositional Factors in Crime and

Delinquency,’ Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 16, 1952, pp. 207-212; an

abstract of his most recent findings, ‘“Systematic Validation of a Test for Delln-

quency,”

appears in the American Psychologist, Vol..9, 1954, p. 381,

96

of recidivists has principally been constructed on the basis of criminal

personality (psychopath) and on the basis of the danger of recidivists

to society.

Professor Dr. Ernst Seelig and Dozent Dr. Hans Bellavic (Aus-

tria) indicate that the probability of future relapse is closely con-

nected with the type of criminal which the individual represents. They

find that the “professional” criminal, because of workshyness, has

the greatest probability to repeat in crime. Such criminals are recog-

nisable in the period of youth, because they display many petty

criminal acts in connection with character defects such as lack of

affection and instability. The criminal development of these persons

is continuous and leads finally to serious chronic property crimes,

sometimes specialised and sometimes multiple in form. The profes-

sional criminals who develop their criminality after maturity rather

than in juvenile age, although rare, are inclined towards specialisa-

tion in crime. Particularly unreformable is the passive type of vaga-

bond. Property offenders, due to decreased powers of resistance are

seldom repeaters. Likewise, the sex offenders in the period of youth

seldom become sex criminals in later life. The rather infrequent (true)

homosexuals and perverts (e.g., sadists) and the much more frequent

sex criminals, arising out of weakness (impotence) display high poten-

tiality for repetition. The aggressive, violent criminal is also prognos-

tically unfavourable. He develops in adult ages of life. Offenders

emanating from emotional crises in their lives show very little ten-

dency to repeat. The criminals from political or religious conviction

have a very small quota of repeaters. The offenders against com-

munity regulations show very little inclination towards recidivism,

with the exception of chronic traffic violators and violators of

currency exchange.

Professor Dr. H. J. Venter (South Africa), using prison statistics,

finds that the non-Europeans (Bantus and peoples of colour) are dis-

proportionately recidivist as compared with the dominant Euro-

peans, which suggests that minority status here as elsewhere increases

criminal liability. He points out that recidivism is primarily an urban

problem and that the overwhelming majority of released prisoners

repeat in crime by 12 months after release, which fact confirms the

same trend in several other countries. Forty-three per cent of the

European recidivists in the Central Prison of Pretoria had their first

conviction between 19 and 20 years of age; 84 per cent, between

19 and 44 years of age. Dr. Venter relates recidivists to a wide variety

of causative factors, only a few of which can be mentioned here:

usually fit persons physically; preponderantly tatooed; 38 per cent

athletic in Kretschmer’s typology; 49 per cent regarded as having

97

CC-G

psychopathic personality and 22 per cent as having neurotic symp-

toms; 45 per cent maladjusted (on the Bernreuter Personality Inven-

tory); unfavourable in educational status; marked apathy towards

religion; greater indulgence than first offenders in drunkenness,

smoking Indian hemp, gambling, and sexual promiscuity; tendency

to begin crime soon after arrival from back country in the city; poor

home environments; large overcrowded families; parent-child

relationships poor; demoralised and vicious homes; discipline in the

home bad; poor relationships with wife in case of married recidivists;

started to work early in life and engaged in unskilled trades; poor

work habits. Dr. Venter suggests that prevention should be done at

the school and juvenile level, that better care of offenders must be

developed, and that better after-care methods must be inaugurated.

Dr. Enrico Altavilla claims that specific recidivism is usually more

dangerous than generic recidivism (a succession of different acts).

The highest proportion of recidivists are property offenders. Their

recidivism depends on a bad environment, occasional episodic

factors, and instinctive drives accompanied by weakness in ethical

sentiments (which type of recidivist is produced by biological causes

and also shows specificity).

The specific recidivist from biological causes may originate from a

compulsive impulse to commit a definite act (e.g., kleptomania) or

from a deviation in instinct (e.g., exhibitionist). Dr. Altavilla ob-

serves that criminologists must still recognise the existence of

recidivists who are produced by anomalies of character. These recidi-

vists are capable of committing any kind of crime, since they have the

greed of a thief, the cruelty of a cut-throat, and the violence of a

sadist. The recidivist from anomaly of character is usually a generic

recidivist and is also quite dangerous. In the instance of repeated

sexual criminals, the unity of their personality is broken by internal

psychic conflict. The personality remains intact, with the exception of

one phase of behaviour. These specific recidivists are dangerous

therefore in only one particular.

Dr. Valdés Santo Tomds (Cuba) found from a study of 500 cases

in a criminological clinic in 1953 that 55 per cent were recidivists;

from a study of 2,670 cases examined from 1939 to 1947 that 42 per

cent were recidivists. Cases of minor relapse comprised 15 per cent

of the total in 1953; 18 per cent of the total in 1939-1947. The dan-

gerous recidivists constituted 40 per cent of the cases studied in 1953

and 39 per cent in 1939-1947. The percentage of recidivists by race in

the 1953 cases were: 47 per cent for the whites, 60 per cent for the

mixed bloods, and 63 per cent for the negroes. The recidivists in

each racial group were classified as minor and as dangerous

98

offenders: 27 and 73 per cent among the white recidivists; 30 and 70

per cent among the mixed bloods; 26 and 74 per cent among the

negroes. The negro criminal in Cuba, probably due to his racial

position, is more recidivist than the white criminal but he does not

differ significantly in regard to proportion of dangerous recidivists.

The International Federation of High Police Officers calls attention

to the fact that the police have an important contribution to make in

the study of recidivists, especially those who are not mentally and

physically abnormal. Three hundred and twenty-four case histories

were forwarded from correspondents of different countries and the

statistics from these are as follows: 318 men, 6 women; 79, 92, 88, 38,

12, and 6 cases in the ten-year age-groups from 20 to 80; 62 rural,

262 urban in origin; like their parents, a concentration in the un-

skilled jobs; more skewed towards miserable and mediocre living

conditions than their parents; 116 having professional criminal

careers, 208 not having developed professional careers in crime; 129

of the 324 married, the remaining being single, divorced, separated,

widowed. Crimes against the person were relatively infrequent. The

Federation contends that the police have an important role to play in

he treatment and prevention of recidivism.

Dr. W. H. Nagel (Netherlands) presents a case history of a young

(28 years old) recidivist, who began with truancy, vagabondage, and

petty theft in the juvenile years of 8 to 14. By the time he was 23 years

of age, a pattern of burglarising residences definitely developed. The

subject takes his stolen loot home to his father but he has no contacts

with receivers of stolen goods. The mother of this lad was committed

to a hospital for the insane when the subject was 11 years of age. The

father was a really bad character. As a child, the subject was inclined

to play by himself. He failed to get the emotional security he needed

from his mother and from his father. The psychiatrist’s reportin 1953

stated that the subject had an infantile emotional development, a

tendency to depression and anxiety, and subnormal power to control

his impulses. Dr. Nagel emphasises the necessity to discover the

“delinquent’s own conception of his criminal existence” in addition

to the usual investigation of milieu and personality in criminal cases.

He thinks that this man could be treated as ““a normal being” and

that an excellent house of correction should be capable of changing

his immature personality development and criminal self concept into

a more mature personality and more normal concept of self.

99

SECTION II

FORMES ET EVOLUTION DU RECIDIVISME

par C. H. Andersen

Le récidivisme est un terme 1égal définissant le comportement de

délinquants, qui n’ont pas été améliorés, assigas ouintimidés par une

premiére mesure pénale et qui ont commis, pour le moins, un délit

subséquent.

Du point de vue psychologique, il importe de rappeler que le cadre

de cette définition est arbitrairement délimité, puisqu’il ne permet

I’étude d’un comportement que dans une situation et qu’il exclut les

aspects extra-juridiques de ce probléme.

RECIDIVISME EN GENERAL

Le petit enfant satisfait une pulsion instinctive en passanta un acte

anti-social. Ces pulsions élémentaires ne sont pas nombreuses: appro-

priation, aggressivité, désir érotique; elles suscitent des actes in-

stinctifs qui permettent de les assouvir. Le réflexe conditionnel, la

méthode d’essais et d’erreurs font acquérir des modéles d’actes, qui

seront exécutés aussi longtemps que le sujet en éprouvera un bénéfice.

Ces actes sont facilités du fait méme de leur répétition. L’acte

habituel n’est qu’un acte instinctif, modelé dans le sens de la plus

grande satisfaction.

Cette adaptation des actes instinctifs ne dépend pas uniquement de

la maturation de l'activité du sujet. Les exemples extérieurs s’im-

posent a lui et lui fournissent de nouveaux modeles d’actes, qui de-

viendront peu a peu automatiques, donc habituels. D’autre part,

I’habitude se maintient aussi longtemps qu’elle assure une satisfac-

tion instinctive. Si les conséquences d’une habitude s’avérent funestes,

néfastes ou simplement génantes, ’acte d’habitude ne sera plus

facilité et tombera en désuétude. La persistance du modéle d’action,

désormais inexécutable, pourra €tre ressentie comme frustration.

Aux actes habituels, révélateurs des pulsions primitives, s’opposent

des “contre-pulsions” (Bize) provenant de I’acceptation de la vie en

groupe et de la conscience de ’existence d’autrui, ressentie identique

a la propre existence. Ces conflits pulsionnels trouvent une solution

plus ou moins heureuse en de nouveaux actes, qui deviennent habi-

tuels. Ils déterminent un comportement secondaire social, donc

100

adapté, ou asocial, donc dé

l.inquant, ou psychonévrotique, donc

inadéquat.

La répétition de I’acte est un comportement humain normal. Les

habitudes de ’homme dépendent de la tendance de ses instincts

primitifs, des exemples de comportement sur lesquels il s’est modelé

et de la conscience qu’il a prise de lui-méme vis-a-vis d’autrui. Ces

facteurs déterminent ses intentions, ses actes et ses attitudes; ils peu-

vent €tre analysés dans son comportement; ils sont révélés par le

métier et le plaisir qu’il choisit, par le partenaire sexuel qu’il préfére,

par ses réactions émotives aux diverses situations de son existence.

Ces habitudes

ou ces récidivismes — pourraient €tre classés chez

I'individu, d’aprés leur origine. On les rapporterait a l'instinct, a la

formation éducative, aux exemples, aux conflits instinctifs, aux frus-

trations, a I'intégration dans le groupe. Cette classification étiolo-

gique prouverait déja que chaque habitude nait de ’inter-action des

facteurs individus, milieu et situation (ou événement).

L’étude des motifs instinctifs révéle deux anomalies possibles. Le

récidivisme peut étre une habitude pulsionnelle, assurant une satis-

faction instinctive, non inhibée par le frein de la socialisation; il peut

€tre aussi une habitude secondaire, née d’un conflit pulsionnel mal

résolu, c’est-a-dire une névrose.

RECIDIVISME CRIMINEL

Le récidivisme qui nous occupe est ’habitude criminelle, la répé-

tition d’actes antisociaux. Cette restriction nécessite un postulat, qui

définisse I’acte antisocial; cette définition est liée & une époque et a

un endroit. L’indigéne de Bornéo, qui se proméne tout nu et qui tue

un étranger pour le dépouiller, n’aura pas commis d’acte antisocial.

Le citoyen irrité qui, seul dans sa chambre, recourt 4 la magie pour se

venger de ses compatriotes, ne commet plus un acte antisocial. C’est

le code pénal, ou le décalogue, ou le consentement de la majorité, qui

détermine ’acte antisocial.

Des actes antisociaux, reconnus comme tels par la communauté,

sont perpétrés par nombre d’individus qui échappent 2 la justice. Des

agents de change, des spéculateurs immobiliers, des fabricants de dro-

gues, des médecins, des agents d’affaires, commettent nombre de

délits. Ces ““‘white-collar criminals’’ sont rarement poursuivis, encore

plus rarement punis.

La complicité professionnelle, la crainte ou

I'1

ascensi

gnorance des victimes, ’habileté procéduriére rendent possibles des

ons sociales spectaculaires axées sur des crimes impunis. Le

sentim

ent populaire absout d’autre part, comme inévitables, de

multiples fraudes politiques et

ne s’insurge plus contre les gains

illicites (something for nothing).

101

De tels récidivismes, bien décrits par Reckless, Barnes et Teeters,

sortent de la définition légale, a laquelle nous devons nous tenir.

Les récidivistes essentiels, ceux qui font du crime, une profession,

échappent également a notre cadre, lorsque le plein succés de leurs

entreprises antisociales leur permet d’éviter les poursuites ou de s’y

soustraire.

Le terme criminologique de récidiviste s’applique, en pratique,

h

aux criminels dits traditionnels,

a

ceux qui peuplent les prisons

(Reckless).

Cette limitation restreint notre étude a des cas concrets, a des cons-

tatations empiriques. Nous nous placerons au seul point de vue

phénoménologique, qui est celui de la psychiatrie clinique. Or, la

psychiatrie analyse les causes et les origines dans un but de préven-

tion générale; elle décrit ’évolution dans un but de thérapeutique

individuelle.

RECIDIVISME PENAL

L’étude des délinquants récidivistes permet de sérier divers as-

pects du récidivisme et d’en décrire les variétés.

1. Classification légale: Le récidive est unique ou multiple, géné-

rique ou spécifique, fréquente ou espacée. Ce classement ignore

la psychologie: le récidivisme y est proportionnel au nombre

des condamnations. Il confond des actes fort différents, le

meurtre sadique et le meurtre par haine, le vol d’une voiture

pour la revendre et le vol d’une voiture pour le plaisir de con-

duire.

Classification descriptive: Les délits habituels sont stéréotypés,

semblables ou divergents. Ces aspects sont révélateurs de cer-

tains comportements, mais ils ne sont pas spécifiques. Le

récidivisme stéréotypé peut étre le fait d’un fétichiste, amateur

d’une parure féminine; il caractérise aussi le schizoide autiste,

I’épileptique et certains débiles mentaux apathiques.

Les délits semblables révélent une habitude intentionnelle; leurs

mobiles peuvent étre fort dissemblables. L’exhibitionnisme, jouis-

sance érotique habituelle, peut étre pratiqué consciemment par des

amateurs de sensation; il peut survenir comme une explosion instinc-

tive chez un dément ou un névrosé. Le cambriolage est parfois un

métier choisi délibérément par un technicien féru de mécanique; il

peut également €tre I’équivalent d’un viol ou une affirmation de

puissance.

Certains récidivismes ne sont divergents qu’en apparence. Van

102

Bemmelen cite la fréquence des délits sexuels imputés a des voleurs et

a des faussaires habituels. Ces délits sexuels sont souvent des équiva-

lents de vols: les vols d’autre part, ont parfois une signification

sexuelle. Le délit sexuel s’impose fréquemment au récidiviste voleur

qui passe tant de temps en prison, qu’il ne peut s’assurer un exutoire

sexuel normal. Morris signale aussi un phénoméne de maturation

criminelle: les expériences délictuelles et pénitentiaires entrainent un

élargissement du champ d’activité et une divergence accrue dans les

délits.

3. Classification selon la carriére criminelle: Le Dr. Valdés de Santo

Tomas distingue le récidivisme par habitude induite, c’est-a-dire

formée secondairement, apres le premier délit.

Il est dii aux mauvaises conditions sociales qui pesent sur le primo-

délinquant: ’appauvrissement, I’ostracisme du milieu, la relégation

dans des groupes 4 moralité émoussée, les exemples des codétenus,

sont les facteurs de ce récidivisme. Il ’attribue donc en ordre princi-

Pal A une répression irrationnelle du premier délit.

Il lui oppose le récidivisme professionnel. Ici, des stimuli normaux,

le désir lucide d’une jouissance, provoquent des actes délictuels,

grace a la carence d’inhibitions rationnelles ou éthiques. Il s’agit en

réalit€ d’un couple de forces, intensité de désir-puissance de frein,

dont la résultante peut étre un délit. La constellation caractérielle

faite d’éléments constitutionnels et acquis, joue ici, un role essentiel.

Les facteurs caractériels criminogénes peuvent étre pathologiques,

savoir un trouble schizopathique, épileptique ou neurotique.

Ce schéma est assez superposable a la classification pénitentiaire

habituelle, qui distingue les récidivistes asociaux et antisociaux. Elle

tend a définir la situation du délinquant vis-a-vis de la communauté et

son degré de périculosité.

4. Classification d’apres le type psychologique: La typologie caracté-

rielle s’est longtemps bornée 4 une classification des tempéra-

ments. On dénomme ainsi le mode de réaction émotionnelle aux

situations affectives. De Freud 3 Szondi, les psychologues ont

défini les caractéres en fonction des tendances instinctives primi-

tives. Les organicistes ont cherché les déterminants caractériels

dans I’anatomie et dans le type d’activité glandulaire. Heymans

et Le Senne ont combiné les tendances actives avec le tempéra-

ment; ils ont décrit huit types statiques aisément reconnaissables.

Wiersma observe avec

justesse, que deux de ces types prédis-

posent au récidivisme: le nerveux répete les actes de violence,

103

les délits préparés en vue du profit, tandis que ’amorphe se

laisse aller & la facilité des petits délits, souvent futiles, instan-

tanés dans leur exécution et leur profit.

Il n’est cependant pas possible d’imaginer une typologie qui tienne

compte de tous les facteurs caractériels. Le caractére est fait d’élé-

ments congénitaux: tendances, moyens psychiques et physiques, tem-

pérament, qui sont plus ou moins harmonieusement adaptés I'un a

I’autre. Il est enrichi de mobiles et d’attitudes, acquis par la formation

éducative; il est modifié par les incidents biologiques qui ont aidé ou

empéché I’épanouissement des dons primitifs. La définition d’un type

aboutirait a une description individuelle. C’est le résultat qu’on

obtient par les tests caractériels (Rorschach et autres).

Il est cependant évident que les comportements humains sont

déterminés principalement par le tempérament, donc par les senti-

ments et les réactions émotives qu’ils provoquent. La criminalité et le

récidivisme sont des comportements; Il importe de relever quels

sentiments se retrouvent le plus fréquemment chez les délinquants

habituels et d’analyser les tendances, les conflits, les conceptions du

monde, (Weltanschauung) qui les déclenchent (dynamics of tempera-

ment).

S. et E. Glueck ont déterminé quels sentiments et quels facteurs

déclenchants sont prépondérants chez I’enfant. Dans ces données, ils

ont choisi des traits de caractére nettement plus fréquents chez les

délinquants que chez les non-délinquants. La statistique de chaque

trait isolé, établi par I’étude de 500 cas, fournit un chiffre élevé, le

pourcentage des délinquants qui ont ce trait et un chiffre minime, le

pourcentage des délinquants qui ne ’ont pas.

La présence ou I’absence de ce trait de caractére sera cotée chez

le délinquant étudié, au moyen de ces chiffres. Le total de cinq cota-

tions pour cinq traits significatifs différents donnera en chiffre la pro-

babilité de délinquance ultérieure, donc de récidivisme du cas étudié.

Un sujet recevra les cotes correspondant a la présence ou a I’ab-

sence des facteurs suivants: affirmation du moi dans le groupe, atti-

tude de défi, méfiance, entétement oppositionnel, labilité émotive. La

somme de ces cotes donnera un chiffre que ’on peut traduire en

pourcentage de chances d’une carriére criminelle. Ces facteurs sont

découverts et appréciés, grace au test de Rorschach.

Une série analogue est sélectionnée par la confrontation des rap-

ports psychiatriques sur ce matériel d’épreuve. Les traits de person-

nalité décisifs sont: le désir impulsif de changement, la spontanéité de

lautomatisme moteur, la suggestibilit¢ par voie émotive pure, la

résistance aux mouvements émotionnels naturels, le malaise ressenti

104

a la suite des conflits pulsionnels. Les deux cotations sont parfaite-

ment superposables, ce qui prouve leur validité.

Ce mode de classification est d’utilité pronostique; il peut aussi

déterminer le traitement. Il semble cependant inapplicable chez les

adultes, dont le caractere et les possibiltés réactives ont été modi-

fices par I'expérience, les incidents et les exemples.

5. Classification d’apres le type criminologique: 1.a méthode d’ana-

lyse psychologique de Glueck permet de déterminer des types de

probabilité récidiviste. Seelig part des types criminels relevés

dans la population pénitentiaire et cherche lesquels sont suscep-

tibles de récidivisme. Dans la multiplicté des combinaisons

homme-milieu et dans la complexité des éléments de person-

nalité, il peut €tre possible d’isoler certaines constellations de

facteurs criminogeénes.

I1 décrit en premier lieu les délinquants professionnels, asociaux et

paresseux, dont ’adynamie se double d’un déficit des inhibitions éthi-

ques et juridiques. Ce groupe est porté au récidivisme. Il y distingue

les cas précoces qui, depuis la prime enfance, se sont assuré des avan-

tages matériels par le vol domestique, qui se sont spécialisés ensuite

dans des modes d’appropriation — escroquerie, cambriolage, vols

avec violence — en rapport avec leur tempérament. Dans leur évolu-

tion ultérieure, apres 20 ans, ils combinent ces divers modes criminels

selon I’occasion la plus lucrative.

Dans ce groupe il discerne aussi des cas tardifs ou la maturité a

vaincu la crainte et I'inhibition morale. Un délit occasionnel, souvent

lié a Pactivité professionnelle, s’est imposé comme modele d’action

lucrative. L’escroquerie au mariage, le détournement de fonds, la

creation de sociétés imaginaires, sont répétés et perfectionnés, et

deviennent une spécialité caractéristique. Il range dans la méme

catégorie, les vagabonds qui accumulent les délits mineurs.

D’autres groupes révélent également une tendance au récidivisme:

Les criminels agressifs par irritabilité excessive et réactions émo-

tives disproportionnées;

Les criminels obsédés par leurs désirs sexuels: les jeunes y sont

contraints par ’excitation pubertaire, qui s’apaise plus ou moins

tot; les adultes ne commen

cent leur carriére criminelle qu’apres

2

5 ans, A cause de la fixation d’un certain mode de jouissance;

Les criminels réactifs primaires, dont ’acte est di 4 un court-cir-

cuit émotif lors de ce

rtains excitants extérieurs: y sont compris

1

es psychopathes et certains délinquants juvéniles;

Les criminels par conviction politique ou éthique;

105

Les criminels par absence de discipline sociale, incapables de

soumettre leurs tendances égoistes aux lois de la communauté.

Les nombreuses tendances de classifications criminologiques dues

a des juristes, des sociologues, des pénologues, reproduisent & peu

prés ce schéma. Ces méthodes permettent également une certaine pré-

diction, quant a ’avenir criminel; elles sont moins utiles au point de

vue de I’étiologie et de la thérapeutique.

6. Classification psychiatrique: La psychiatrie étudie les comporte-

ments anormaux; elle en recherche des déterminants anatomo-

ou physio-pathologiques. A défaut de ceux-ci, elle décrit les

insuffisances et les anomalies des fonctions psychiques instinc-

tives, émotives et intellectuelles qui pourraient expliquer le com-

portement aberrant. Elle scrute enfin ’anamneése, qui révelera

les influences délétéres du milieu exemplatif ou éducatif et les

incidents biographiques, qui ont inhibé ou refoulé le libre jeu

des tendances originelles. C’est dire que la psychiatrie est actuel-

lement d’obédience ou neurologique ou psychanalytique.

Le récidivisme pose un probléme psychiatrique. Le crime ou le

délit isolé peut étre commis par chaque individu: c’est une erreur, un

péché, une vengeance, une recherche de sensations. L’acte est plus

ou moins lucidement préparé, mais il a une conséquence imprévue, la

punition. Le crime habituel, malgré la punition répétée, semble bien

étre un comportement pathologique.

Depuis Lombroso, 1a recherche des stigmates anatomiques et des

altérations histologiques fut poursuivie par de nombreux savants. Les

découvertes de I’Ecole italienne ont €t€¢ magistralement synthétisées

par Di Tullio. La constitution de chaque homme comporte un en-

semble de caractéristiques morphologiques, fonctionnelles et psycho-

logiques. Une constitution particuliere serait propre aux criminels

qui se distinguent par la précocité, la persistance, la gravité de leurs

crimes. Il existerait une base organique a la criminalité; le tempéra-

ment modelé par le milieu social donne a ce type somatique — ou ne

lui donne pas — les stimuli nécessaires pour accomplir les actions

délictueuses. Chez ’homme de type non criminel, I’excitation émo-

tive ne vainc pas le seuil de résistance, qui est fonction de I’équilibre

constitutionnel. Di Tullio distingue trois constitutions essentielles:

Le criminel constitutionnel commun hypoévolué¢ montre une dégé-

nérescence physique variable accompagnée d’'une moindre valeur psy-

chologique. Cette psychodégénération le rend plus vulnérable aux

difficultés extérieures et son activité criminelle est proportionnée au

nombre des situations criminogeénes rencontrees.

106

Le criminel constitutionnel & orientation neuropsychopathique est

caractérisé par une morphologie microsplanchnique et un déséqui-

libre humoral latent ou déclaré. Ses tares psychiques sont révélées par

le comportement; celui-ci peut étre épileptiforme (fréquent), hystari-

forme ou neurasthéniforme. Chacun de ces comportements donnera

une criminalité habituelle caractéristique.

Le criminel constitutionnel a orientation psychopathique est avant

tout un déséquilibré caractériel. Les formes psychopathiques habi-

tuelles, c’est-a-dire la débilité mentale I’égocentrisme, la rétractation

paranoide, le débordement imaginatif, I’hypertrophie du moi, 'isole-

ment schizoidique, deviennent dangereuses, chez lui, 3 cause du

substratum organique glandulaire et nerveux de sa constitution.

Le récidivisme serait donc une tare congénitale, inéluctable méme,

pour peu que les évenements en déclenchent le mécanisme.

Dublineau est moins convaincu de cette malédiction constitution-

nelle. Ce sont les moments de transformation physio-psychologiques

qui importent dans I’histoire de I’'individu. Ces moments sont en fait

des périodes d’inadaptation au stade ultérieur qu’il faut atteindre.

Les passages 4 la deuxiéme enfance, A ’adolescence, A la ménopause,

a la vieillesse sont dangereux: I'individu est transitoirement rétracté;

il a perdu le contact avec ’'ambiance. Il est immature par rapport au

stade psychologique qu’il doit atteindre. La persistance de cet état de

transition crée une inadaptation caractérielle —névrose ou psycho-

pathie -— qui augmente la probabilité délinquentielle. Cette incapacité

de terminer une évolution, donc le prolongement anormal d’une

phase propice a4 la délinquance, serait surtout fréquente chez les

epileptiques avérés, larvés ou caractériels, qu’il englobe dans le

terme de diathése convulsive.

Il est évident que 1’épilepsie sous toutes ses formes signifie une

irritabilité plus grande du cortex cérébral. Les altérations encépha-

liques étudiées par Brousseau, provoquent également des déteriora-

tions psychiques. Les encéphalites, les traumatismes méningés, les

nevraxites semblent pervertir les qualités psychiques supérieures, sur-

tout lorsqu’elles surviennent aux moments évolutifs décrits plus haut.

Les anomalies découvertes par I’E.E.G., le pneumoencéphale ou a

trépanation exploratrice, expliquent parfois le comportement délin-

quentiel persévérant.

On peut affirmer qu’il existe un récidivisme neurologique; I’état

actuel de nos connaissances nous interdit pourtant d’attribuer une

telle étiologie A toute criminalité invétérée. Des opérations curatives,

notamment la leucotomie, ont pu guérir certains récidivismes: la

localisation cérébrale du sympt

Ome n’en est rien moins que prouvée.

La psychiatrie clinique disti

ngue les comportements anormaux en

107

névrotiques, psychopathiques et psychotiques. Les psychoses, qu’elles

soient démentielles ou essentielles, comportent toujours une altéra-

tion telle du moi, que les conduites désordonnées ou pseudologiques

du malade, y compris le récidivisme criminel, doivent étre con-

sidérées comme un symptome de la maladie. Elles ne signifient pas un

comportement propre a l'individu. Les mécanismes de pensée et

d’action du psychotique sont comme démontés, isolés ou ralentis;

ils fournissent un champ d’expériences occasionnelles qui permet-

tent de comprendre ces mémes mécanismes imbriqués et rapides chez

I’homme normal. Mais, comme le dit Giscard, méme si des déments

posent des actes répétés, on ne peut parler chez eux de récidive au

sens criminologique du mot. Les névroses et les psychopathies, par

contre, déterminent fréquemment le récidivisme.

Mackwood étudie le probléme en recherchant quels récidivistes

sont suceptibles d’étre traités psychiatriquement. Il sépare ceux qui

ont une anomalie mentale, de la masse des normaux.

Dans ce dernier groupe, il range les individus anémotifs, qui

accomplissent leurs forfaits sans anxiété et qui ne les regrettent pas

par aprés. Ils n’éprouvent ni respect, ni haine, ni méme intérét pour

la personnalité d’autrui. Ils transgressent les lois aussi souvent

qu’elles posent des obstacles a leurs désirs. Ils sont dépourvus de ce

qu’on peut appeler la conscience ou le sur-moi. Leur moi raisonnable

n’a pas ¢té formé par une discipline et une éducation adéquates;

souvent méme la discipline a suscité en eux une volonté d’obstruction.

L’absence de sur-moi, I'inadaptation du moi seraient dues aux

facteurs du milieu.

Dans le groupe des anormaux, il cite d’abord les types psycho-

névrotiques. Le psychonévrosé accomplit certains actes pour se

libérer d’une angoisse; cette angoisse nait du conflit entre la tendance

instinctive et la volonté inconsciente de ne pas s’y plier. Ses actes sont

de substitution ou de compensation; le moi qui les exécute est plus ou

moins obnubilé. Le psychonévrosé ordinaire est cependant protégé

par une inhibition sociale ou morale inconsciente, qui limite ses

désirs antisociaux a des réalisations imaginaires. Si 'immaturité men-

tale ou I’obnubilation trop grande du moi permettant au névrosé de

commettre des délits, il répéte ceux-ci sans fin. Les punitions succes-

sives suppriment davantage son activit¢é normale et aggravent son

angoisse. Le véritable mobile des délits répétés de fagon monotone

par les psychonévrosés n’est pas le désir de jouissance, c’est bien plus

le besoin toujours plus pressant de se libérer de I’angoisse.

Les personnalités névrotiques simples souffrent d’un conflit entre

tendances opposées. Ce n’est pas I'inhibition morale qui lutte contre

leurs tendances; leur conflit est resté a 1’état brut, dérivant de désirs

108

simultanés et inconciliables. Les solutions boiteuses ou absurdes, qui

peuvent se matérialiser en actes délictueux, révélent une tension émo-

tionnelle permanente, datant de la plus lointaine enfance. Ces név-

rosés veulent justifier leurs actes vis-a-vis d’eux-mémes et d’autrui;

ils refoulent toute idée de responsabilité et rejettent sur autrui le

blame, qu’ils mériteraient. Leurs délits ont une allure rigide, forma-

liste méme, qui peut sembler obsessionnelle dans les cas graves. Ils

n’ont pas raisonné leurs actions, ils croient obéir & un démon

intérieur.

Le milieu a une influence dans la genése de cette criminalité. En

donnant, ou ne donnant pas, au névrosé, licence de libérer sa tension

émotionnelle, en admettant ou en refusant ses actes absurdes, il

déterminera ou bien une carriére de récidiviste criminel, ou bien une

existence d’inadapté social.

Le psychopathe subit le méme conflit entre tendances contradic-

toires, mais il n’en éprouve guére de tension émotionnelle, parce que

son moi est entrainé vers I’acte de jouissance le plus immédiat. Le

moi, ici, n’est pas oblitéré, il est anormal par débilité mentale, par

eréthisme émotif, par hypertrophie égocentrique. Le récidivisme du

psychopathe a les formes les plus variées, selon le type de désé-

quilibre; il se distingue en général par la résolution instantanée,

Paveuglement devant les conséquences, I’évasion dans I’imaginaire.

Ce récidivisme est caractérisé par Iindifférence envers les délits,

'ent€tement parfois paranoide dans Paffirmation du mensonge,

I'absurdité dans 'accumulation des actes antisociaux, dont 1’effort

est hors de proportion avec le résultat possible. Il n’est pas enrayé

par la punition; celle-ci au contraire augmente I'isolement du moi et

aggrave donc le déséquilibre.

On ne peut décrire tous les aspects de la psychopathie. Le syn-

drome essentiel en est le déséquilibre caractériel; les fonctions psy-

chiques isolées sont normales, mais leur activité conjointe est inadé-

quate et provoque un comportement anormal. Ce déséquilibre peut

avoir tous les degrés de gravité et donner les résultantes le plus diver-

gentes, selon les éléments en jeu et selon le milieu qui subit son

[ 4

activité. L’

€

quilibre parfait est fort rare; chaque homme, ou presque,

présente une inadaptation dans certaines circonstances, une faille

dans sa structure; son com

portement en est toujours influencé. Nous

l,

appelons psychopathe seulement lorsque ce déséquilibre provoque

une conduite intolérable pour lui-méme ou pour son entourage. Cette

définition pratique nous oblige & compléter ce diagnostic trop général

par des indications €tiologiques et descriptives.

La classification psychiatrique est pragmatique comme toutes les

nosographies. Son but est moins la prédiction, que la recherche de

109

I’élément pathogeéne en vue de son traitement. Le psychiatre admet

aussi bien les facteurs sociaux que les caractéres génétiques; il sait

d’ailleurs qu’ils sont inséparables. Il ne croit pas en des groupes nette-

ment séparés de malades. Toutes les transitions existent entre le

normal et le pathologique, entre un syndrome et ’autre. Les termes

qu’il emploie,

névrose,

psychopathie,

socialisation,

1solement

schizoide, etc., n’ont -pas la signification tranchée et restreinte des

termes d’une classification zoologique.

Le psychiatre indique par son diagnostic, chez chaque individu,

le caractére significatif, le symptome qui détermine I’affection, ici le

récidivisme. Il sait que ce symptdme n’est pas isolé, qu’il résulte de

facteurs complexes. Ceux-ci peuvent changer, le symptome résultant

changera aussi, on lui donnera parfois un nom nouveau.

Sa classification ne pourra étre statique, elle verra le criminel dans

son devenir, son évolution passée et future.

L’EVOLUTION DU RECIDIVISME CRIMINEL

Le récidivisme est surtout un probléme de ’enfance et de I’adoles-

cence (Spencer). Prés de la moitié des récidivistes avérés a subi une

premiere condamnation avant 17 ans. Rares sont ceux qui ont débuté

dans la carriere criminelle apres 25 ans. Une place a part doit étre

réservée aux délinquants agés ou prématurément vieillis, dont les

méfaits répétés sont un des symptomes de la dégradation psychique.

Chez les délinquants jeunes, Glueck a pu dépister dans 459, des

cas, une conduite antisociale déja avant ’age de 7 ans; 809, se sont

signalés avant ’age de 10 ans par des vols familiaux, ’école buis-

sonniére, des larcins dans la rue.

Les récidivistes accumulent le plus grand nombre de délits entre

16 et 21 ans (Barnes). Vers 30-35 ans, il y a une atténuation dans

Pintensité du récidivisme. Venter situe la fin de carriére entre 38 et 47

ans. Il Pattribue a une maturation morale. Le plus grand nombre de

récidivistes recherchent alors le calme de la vie honnéte, d’autres se

fixent dans des emplois suspects de receleurs ou de conseilleurs, cer-

tains se fondent dans ’armée des petits asociaux (a nuisance rather

than a danger to society).

L’allure de cette évolution est généralement admise; les statistiques

sont assez comparables. En fait, cette évolution confirme ’hypothése

psychologique déja admise. Une tendance antisociale s’affirme lors

des crises du développement psychique. Le petit enfant se désidentifie

d’avec la mere, 1l affirme une volonté consciemment égoiste (Trotz-

periode). Par la suite, il s’intégrera au groupe ou bien il refusera cette

socialisation. Dans ce cas, deux solutions sont possibles: la régression

110

infantile, en fait, la névrose, ou bien I’isolement social, c’est-a-dire la

persistance dans la perversité. L’adolescent, miiri physiquement par

la puberté, conscient de sa force et de ses désirs, commence son

évolution d’adulte dans une affirmation de soi, une négation de

lautorité, un détachement du groupe familial. La maturation

psychique plus ou moins rapide le fait se réintégrer dans un groupe

élargi; il admet autrui comme un égal et accepte la solidarité

humaine. S’il reste immature, s’il persiste dans son isolement

révolté, son comportement restera antisocial. Le hasard, les circon-

stances, 1’exigence de ses désirs le conduiront aux actes antisociaux.

Une maturation tardive peut intervenir, elle peut méme étre le

résultat d’un traitement psychiatrique. Les désirs instinctifs s’atté-

nuent avec ’age; les habitudes peuvent étre déviées a cause de leurs

effets néfastes, notamment par la correction pénale. Toujours est-il

que vers 35 ans, on constate une atténuation du récidivisme, ce que

Glueck appelle “le retour d’dge du criminel”.

Mais des individus psychiquement miirs peuvent commencer une

carriere criminelle a tout age. Ils ne sont pas trés nombreux; ils ne

representeraient que quelques pourcents du nombre des récidivistes.

Leurs actes résultent d’un choix délibéré, qui engage toute leur per-

sonnalité consciente. Ce sont les professionnels vrais, que l'intelli-

gence et I'astuce préservent souvent des condamnations méritées.

On peut rappeler a leur sujet, la boutade de Shaw: “Si un homme

vole un pain, il ira en prison; s’il vole un chemin de fer, il a des

chances d’arriver au Parlement”’.

Tout différent est le récidiviste qui débute dans la carriére crimi-

nelle, lors de la détérioration de I'individu, qu’elle soit due a I’age,

a la maladie, a I’effondrement social. Ses délits se succédent d’une

facon impulsive, souvent maladroite. Ils cesseront 2 cause d’une

déchéance physique trop prononcée ou par I'application de mesures

pénitentiaires ou psychiatriques drastiques. On peut rattacher a cette

categorie, tous ceux qui, entrés en prison comme délinquants occa-

sionnels, en sortent récidivistes en puissance. Ils ont été détériorés

Ou non corrigeés.

L’évolution du récidivisme est déterminée par deux facteurs fon-

damentaux. La maturation psychologique permet une meilleure

adaptation de I'individu dans le milieu; elle est due a une améliora-

tion de la conscience du moi et a I'usure des réactions émotives

exubérantes. La maturation criminelle d’autre part, signifie une

meilleure adaptation de I’individu dans le milieu criminel. Il utilise

mieux ses capacités en vue de ses délits. Il devient plus conscient des

motifs et des buts de ceux-ci; il perd les réactions émotives qui inhi-

baient ses désirs et ses actes.

111

Dans les deux cas, I’évolution affecte le moi; dans le premier, il

devient sensible aux impulsions du sur-moi (quel qu’il soit); dans le

second, il se libére du sur-moi.

Nous ne croyons pas possible de réaliser une synthése des points

de vue différents adoptés par ceux qui ont étudiés les formes de

récidivisme. Ils reflétent d’une part, les positions des diverses écoles

de psychologie et répondent d’autre part, & des préoccupations

différentes: étiologie, analyse, traitement, statistique.

Le psychiatre pénitentiaire vit au contact d’une population de réci-

divistes. 11 s’efforce de déterminer pour chacun son type de récidi-

visme dans un but essentiellement pratique, puisqu’il doit provoquer

la mesure la plus appropriée a chaque cas et expliquer celui-ci a ses

collaborateurs du systeme pénitentiaire. Le probléme journalier

écarte souvent la théorie; le résultat pratique s’obtient par la logique

du bon sens, dont le psychiatre n’a pas le monopole.

ASPECT PENITENTIAIRE PRATIQUE

Est récidiviste celui qui revient en prison apres avoir subi une pre-

miére peine.

A. NON-RECIDIVISTES

1. Ne reviennent pas en prison, les délinquants dont le délit résulte

d’une situation ou d’un état mental passager, qui ne se repro-

duira plus. Il peut s’agir d’'une modification transitoire de la

personnalité: crise maniaco-dépressive, état épileptique, para-

lysie générale. Ce délit peut €tre dii aussi & un état unique de

tension émotive — angoisse, peur, coleére, désespoir — provoqué

par la guerre, la maladie d’un €tre cher, la ruine, I'infidélité

conjugale, ’humiliation, la panique. Sa réaction délictuelle est le

symptome d’une névrose momentanée, tout homme, dans cer-

taines circonstances, est capable d’une réaction hystérique.

Le primo délinquant s’est amendé parce que la premiére peine a

laissé un souvenir de peur ou de honte, qui inhibe toute pulsion

ultérieure, ou parce que ces pulsions sont relativement trop

faibles. Le désir de sécurité, joint aux exemples du milieu, lui fait

réintégrer le groupe social et lui fait apprécier ses lois. Il y a

maturation psychique.

Le primo délinquant est devenu plus habile et plus prudent: il

répeéte les actes antisociaux non prévus par la loi, ou bien il

améliore sa technique de fagon & n’étre plus pris sur le fait. Il y

a icl maturation criminelle.

112

B. LES RECIDIVISTES

1. Ceux qui sont pas assagis, ni intimidés par les peines subies. 1ls

ont choisi consciemment de satisfaire leurs pulsions et dédaig-

nent les lois du groupe social. Ils imaginent et préparent leurs

délits futurs pendant leur séjour en prison.

Ce récidivisme, qu’on peut appeler professionnel, revét plusieurs

aspects.

(a) Le sur-moi, la conscience morale exige les actes délictueux,

parce qu’ills correspondent aux actes exemplaires, dont le

modele fut fourni par ’éducation. Ce récidivisme peut étre

spécifique chez les gangsters, auxquels la conscience du

groupe impose un comportement pseudo-moral, chez les

déserteurs par objection de conscience, chez les criminels

politiques. I1 peut aussi étre inspiré par le choix d’une atti-

tude héroique de défi, de courage, d’adresse. Les violences

envers P'autorité, les délits de la circulation, le braconnage

peuvent relever de cette exaltation sportive.

(b) Le sur-moi absent ou insuffisant n’impose pas de frein affectif

aux actes. Il faut envisager ici la possibilité d’'une encépha-

lose criminogéne (Bachet). Ici domine la froide détermina-

tion de satisfaire un appétit; cet appétit peut tendre a ’ar-

gent, a la réussite dans les affaires, a ’élimination violente de

rivaux, a la satisfaction érotique, sadique ou pédophile.

Cette non-formation de sur-moi pourrait étre expliquée par

un milieu amorphe et amoral; il semble qu’un facteur patho-

logique personnel intervienne aussi. Trop souvent, on ren-

contre des types de ce genre dans des lignées d’enfants par-

faitement adaptés, dans un milieu normal. Ils n’ont pas

souffert d’infériorité, ni de frustration. Leur perversité méme

est généralement précoce.

La rétractation (Dublineau), la schizoidie anémotive sont les

diagnostics posés; ils exigent une anamnése et une observa-

tion soigneuses. Ils peuvent étre confondus avec une démence

précoce fruste ou avec une débilité mentale pseudo-

apathique. Cette catégorie représente un exemple de déséqui-

libre psychopathique. Le déréglement du moi est provoqué

par ’anomalie des tendances instinctives.

(c) Le sur-moi est exclu par I’éréthisme émotif permanent. Un

etat hypomaniaque isole P’individu dans un sentiment d’in-

tense satisfaction personnelle; les fonctions raisonnables sont

réduites a lactivité imminente. Les constructions mytho-

113

CC—H

manes, l'imagination fébrile ménent ces individus aux

escroqueries hasardeuses, aux affaires imaginaires, aux

mensonges homériques. Leurs victimes sont légion; leur

prévoyance est nulle. Ils ne prennent aucune précaution dans

I’élaboration de leurs méfaits; ils ne respectent aucune

logique dans leur défense et dans leur argumentation, leur

cécité mentale pour I’avenir est totale. Ils restent semblables

a eux-mémes, en prison: le marché noir, la médisance, les

promesses absurdes, les récits qui veulent éveiller ’admira-

tion ou la compassion sont révélateurs d’un psychisme tou-

jours identique. Dans certains de ces cas, on soupgonne une

1ésion encéphalique.

De toute fagon, cette excitation permanente est d’ordre psy-

chopathique. On la retrouve dans le comportement indisci-

pliné de leur enfance, dans leur scolarité irréguliére, leurs

occupations toujours changeantes et dans I'instabilité de leur

vie érotique.

(d) La faiblesse ou I’inconsistance du moi peut déterminer ce

récidivisme conscient. Les débiles mentaux abandonnés i

eux-mémes ou relégués dans I'isolement par le dédain agacé

de leurs proches, cherchent de petits profits, de petites satis-

factions sexuelles. Les apathiques cultivent le vol simple, la

mendicité, ’exhibition, le frolement libidineux. Les débiles

frustrés cherchent une illusion de puissance dans le vol

d’auto ou dans les vols d’argent, qui leur permettent de faire

figure dans les bistrots et les salles de danse.

Ceux qui sont intimidés au assagis par une premiére mesure judi-

ciaire admettent que leur délit est une faute; leur sur-moi défend

une répétition. Méme dans la dénégation, ils affirment implicite-

ment qu’ils condamnent P’acte nié.

Leur récidivisme naitra de situations criminogénes non ressenties

lors du premier jugement ou de la répétition des motifs dont ils

ne sentaient pas I’aiguillon en prison.

(a) La récidive est due aux facteurs de milieu. Le libéré est en-

trainé par les exemples ou les complicités retrouvés aux lieux

de travail et de plasir, ou méme dans la famille. Les cambrio-

lages, les vols & main armée, le faux-monnayage, toutes les

combinaisons véreuses sont perpétrés & nouveau. La reprise

de ’activité délinquante peut étre due aux exigences du con-

joint, aux dettes contractées pendant la détention, a la reprise

de certaines habitudes onéreuses. Elle peut €tre concomitante

114

de la reprise de la profession. Le caissier, le représentant, le

cafetier, le marin, retrouvent les tentations habituelles qui

s’imposent au cours des activités redevenues automatiques.

(Fraudes, abus de confiance, contrebande.)

Enfin, le milieu pénitentiaire lui-méme peut, en cours de

détention, avoir imprimé de nouvelles conceptions ou

réveillé d’anciennes tendances de jouissance.

On retrouve souvent chez eux les mémes éléments carac-

tériels que nous avons décrits chez les récidivistes conscients.

La rétractation schizoide, I’éréthysme hypomane y sont

atténués. Les types de déséquilibre ou d’insuffisance sont

moins prononcés et dus pour une plus grande part aux

facteurs éducatifs ou accidentels, moins a des troubles con-

stitutionnels. La lutte contre le récidivisme trouve ici son

champ le plus fructueux.

(b) La récidive résulte de la réincidence des excitants psycholo-

giques de jadis au sortir de la prison. La constatation de

I'impotence réveille la jalousie du paranoiaque, la rechute

dans P’alcoolisme fait retomber le fraudeur, le voleur de

bicyclettes, le violent dans I’obnubilation, qui permet les

exces d’antan. On constate le méme genre de récidive chez

I’oligophréne ou le dément, qui oublient la peur et la honte

éprouvees en prison et qui perdent leur complexe de culpa-

bilité. Les mémes situations provoquent

a nouveau les

\

mémes dé€lits, que ce soient des difficultés économiques ou

des tentations impérieuses.

(©) Les névrosés retrouvent les associations inconscientes qui

déclenchent le mécanisme émotif dangereux. L’angoisse des

obsédés les pousse a se libérer par I’exhibitionnisme, par le

vol dans les grands magasins, par I'incendie volontaire.

L’obsédé masochiste recherche parfois ’humiliation et la

punition. C’est le motif inconscient de bien des attentats aux

meeurs, surtout chez les homosexuels.

La régression hystérique fait reprendre des attitudes infan-

tiles: théatralisme vantard, refus obstiné, recherche de jouis-

sance immédiate. Le délit souvent absurde signifie parfois la

révolte contre les parents, le désir de les mettre devant le fait

accompli, qui les forcera a la sollicitude. Les réactions

puériles de fuite dev

ant la responsabilité, les impulsions d’en-

fa

d

nt gaté, font commettre de nouvelles griveleries, des larcins,

€s attentats sur deg mineurs.

(d) Les psychopathes du type “haltlos’’, les fugueurs, les porio-

manes, les cycliques déprimés introvertis, sont 4 I’égal des

115

névrosés, victimes d’impulsions qu’ils subissent sans les com-

prendre. Leurs délits les libérent d’une tension émotion-

nelle, provoquée, par le contact social. Ils ne consistent pas

seulement dans l’appropriation indue d’une jouissance,

comme ils I’avaient cru eux-mémes dans 1’équilibre calme de

la prison. La fuite devant le sentiment d’infériorité, le désir

de ne plus se sentir un raté, les poussent a 'ivresse paroxy-

stique, mais aussi a des actes de violence, vols et viols, qui les

délivrent de leur rancceur.

Cet apergu pratique sur une population de récidivistes ne décrit

certes pas toutes les formes possibles de récidivisme. Il démontre

seulement que ces formes ne sont pas tranchées. Le méme diagnostic

psychologique s’applique a des formes de récidivisme différentes dans

leur signification sociale. Un diagnostic psychiatrique englobe sou-

vent des éléments de plusieurs anomalies psychologiques: le névrose,

la psychopathie, la débilité mentale, la psychose méme, se mélent

dans un individu. Une personnalité est toujours trop complexe pour

étre définie par un diagnostic.

La personnalité dépend de la constitution psychique; elle dépend

aussi de la structure et de la santé physiques. Elle est forgée selon les

exemples du milieu et les habitudes du groupe; elle s’épanouit ou se

rétracte selon les incidents de P’existence.

L’analyse d’une personnalité étudie tous ces facteurs; chez nos

patients, cctte analyse tachera d’isoler le facteur significatif de récidi-

visme, afin de lui trouver un traitement et une prévention.

116

SECTION 111

CAUSES OF RECIDIVISM

by Professor P. A. H. Baan

In considering this subject we are confronted at once with two

problems, firstly, the concept of recidivism and, secondly, its cause.

As regards the meaning of recidivism, it strikes us that the rappor-

teurs in this Section have given little attention to the definition of this

concept. They presumably considered that this was unnecessary be-

cause the whole of Section I was devoted toit. And yet it is impossible

to ignore this point altogether, when the ‘“‘causes” of this pheno-

menon have to be discussed.

(a) Is a recidivist one who has repeatedly fallen into the arms

of the law?

(b) Is a recidivist one who—whether he falls into the arms of

the law or not—repeats an action which renders him liable

to punishment?

(¢) Or is a recidivist one who has more than once offended

against the general standards on which a well-organised

community is based?

Both the reports in this section and the aim of this Congress have

increased my fear that it is probably the first group with which we

shall be concerned. This considerably narrows the basis of investiga-

tion in a way which, from the scientific psychological point of view,

is hardly justifiable. According to my view, the problem of group (a)

cannot be properly understood without treating it in connection with

and against the background of the problem of those included in

group (b), and especially of those included in group (c). As the con-

ception put forward in (a) is the usual one, I shall start from this

angle, but I should like to remark that though recidivists in the sense

of groups (b) and (c) are not called by that name, and though unfor-

tunately little can be said about them owing to the difficulties of

recognition and investi

rather more, dan

gation, yet they certainly are not less, but

gerous than the recidivists in the sense of (a). To put

it more strong]

y: if we succeed in fathoming the problem of group

(c), then that o

f (b), and even more of (a) in particular, can be con-

sidered from a

different and, it seems to me, from a more exact and

scientifically ju

stifiable point of view than has hitherto been possible.

117

For we are faced with the actual fact that the recidivists in group (a),

who actually come into contact with the law, represent only an

extremely small fraction of humanity, at the most a small percentage

of all the people in the world. It is a simple fact of experience that

more than 95 per cent of all human beings have never come into

contact with the law as the result of any crime, and it seems to me

astonishing that this fact has never received the attention it deserves.

This is all the more surprising, because nearly everyone whose social

life is governed by regulations and standards, such, for instance, as

those given in the Ten Commandments, has a constant tendency to

infringe these standards. Those who actually do so must account for

a very high proportion indeed of the community, even if one only

considers those transgressions which are regarded as crimes. They

remain, however, outside the reach of the law and even almost com-

pletely outside our knowledge. To me it seems unjust, however, to

exclude them from the scope of this Congress. Of the remaining

5 per cent who do come into contact with the law—and this is prob-

ably a very high estimate—it appears that on an average half of

them can be classified as recidivists in the usual sense of the term. For

this Congress it is of the utmost importance to know whether there is

a fundamental or only a difference of degree between these recidivists

and those mentioned under (b) and (¢). But in connection with the

inquiry as to the ‘“‘causes” it is important to know whether all the

recidivists of group (a), or some of them, or none of them, belong

to the ‘“deranged” in the psychiatric-psychological-social sense.

Modern psychiatry has, for instance, shown that all symptoms and

syndromes, such as we find in psychiatrically deranged persons, also

occur in the so-called average normal persons. Every normal person

experiences obsessions, compulsions, fears, panic-reactions, slighter

or more serious states of disintegrations, suspicions and delusions,

retardation or quickening of the process of thinking, failing or intui-

tion, slighter or more serious disturbances in emotional experience,

etc., but that does not mean that the entire human race is psychia-

trically deranged. Bumke (Netherlands) analysed fully these distur-

bances in the normal human being and came to the conclusion fhat,

apart from the question whether there is a fundamental difference or

not between the psychia rically diseased and the average healthy

person, the criterion of disease depends on the duration of the symp-

toms, that is to say, the persistence with which they remain in the

personality, a persistence which has probably a morbid foundation.

On these basic questions so far little reliable scientific work has

been done in criminology. For the moment, the study of recidivism

in the sense of group (a) has brought to light a wealth of correlations.

118

We see, for instance, the correlation with juvenile delinquency: Frey,

(Switzerland), the Gluecks (U.S.A.); the correlation with broken

homes, physical disfunctions, such as those already given by Lom-

broso, and in modern times by the neo-Lombrosians Di Tullio

(Italy), Pende (Italy) and perhaps in France Bachet, too. We read

and hear—as well as observing in our own clinical investigations—

that there were starved emotions and disturbances in connection with

the relationships with the father and mother, and that there is pre-

sumably a high correlation between criminality in general (and

recidivism in particular) and emotional neglect. The reports speak of

heredity, of poverty in youth, (in striking contrast to this conception

compare the impression of Hermon in his excellent report of the

experiences during the first seven years of the new state of Israel). In

these connections we are able to give many examples from, for in-

stance, the very thorough pioneer work of Dr. and Mrs. Glueck.

We are, however, asked to consider the causes of recidivism, and

this brings us to the second of the big problems mentioned. Griinhut

(U.K.) has presented us with a fine and well-thought-out report, to

which I gladly refer. He rightly points out that modern science, with

its enormous increase in empirical data concerning endless numbers

of factors “leads sometimes to the bewildering impression that in the

sphere of human behaviour everything can be a cause of anything”,

and he continues, “While for some time we have preferred the

modest term of factor for the pretentious concept of cause, we

become now even more cautious and speak of characteristics of

criminals”. He points out, as do other rapporteurs, that *“there is not

an alternative but a coincidence of personal and social factors”, and

the chief thing is to understand more of the position of all these

factors “within the structure of crime causation’’. He also reminds

us—and having read many reports I am convinced that this reminder

was more than necessary—that ““in criminological research, as in

Medicine, the interest has . . . shifted from single symptoms to com-

plex syndromes, from individual factors to certain patterns of life”.

The rest of his report relates to the conception dictated to us by the

spirit of the time—a conception which in anthropology, the science

of human condition, is today very cogent—that one has to deal

with “the individual as a member of the group”’; and this can be

numb

extended ad libitum t

o the world wherein this group and endless

ers of groups of endless numbers of individuals, stand in con-

stant interrelation to on

e another. He rightly ends his important

report by enunciatin

g two principles which are fundamental both for

theoretical

discussion and practical fieldwork, namely, (1) that there

is no long

T any sense in searching for abstract prototypes of the

119

“criminal” and the recidivist, and/or carrying out an inquiry as to

the causes of such a phenomenon, and, (2) that one of the most

important characteristics of scientific research in these days is that

there is such a ‘““notable re-emergence of the human factor™.

To me it seems of the utmost importance to state all this anew, for

it 1s perhaps the gravest temptation of the scientific worker nowadays,

when the study of scientific methods is still so burdened by the spirit

of the nineteenth century materialism, to search again and again for

the cause of some abstract phenomenon or other, a temptation to

which, for instance, Di Tullio (Italy), as well as Wiersma (Nether-

lands) and, to some extent, Stanciu (France), have only too easily

succumbed. This temptation is all the more dangerous because

recidivism, it is true, may appear to be a definite phenomenon, since

it requires constant jurisprudential and penitentiary-political inter-

vention, but we must bear in mind that in the last instance it is

caused by the actions of persons and fellow-creatures who, owing to

whatever conglomeration of causes, constitute a danger to the legal

order. I think, however, that it is quite as dangerous for the legal

order and for the social order in the wider sense, when research

workers try to show by means of dogmatic statements and unproved

assertions, as well as by untenable hypotheses, what is the cause of

recidivism. This is in itself unscientific, since the study of science is a

search for truth, whereas to propound as truth things absolutely un-

proved, is quite irrelevant to this search. If these haphazard state-

ments and scientifically untenable premises opened any perspectives

whatever, it would not be so bad. Mostly, however, they are steeped

29 (13

in the blackest pessimism. Terms like “‘endogeny

’

psychopathy”,

etc. are bandied about as if they concerned the most self-evident

things in the world. As a result, both among research workers and

those practical workers who are concerned with criminological prob-

lems in a wider sense, (criminal law, psychiatry, psychology, socio-

logy, etc.), a spirit of discouragement and defeatism is engendered,

and this unfortunately may often colour their attitude towards ques-

tions of the causation and continuance of recidivism. This does not

alter the fact that the work carried out by these investigators deserves

our appreciation. This applies particularly to the great quantity of

correlations brought to light by the Gluecks (U.S.) and Frey (Switzer-

land), although, however many new points of view these investiga-

tions have produced, they are hardly relevant to a better understand-

ing of a *“‘cause”, 1n so far as this would make a prognosis justifiable.

But all this material remains to some extent relevant to the compre-

hension of endless conditional factors, so that I think we must be

grateful for the material collected with so much energy and per-

120

severance. The essence of every “einmalige” conduct or misconduct

(1.e. performed once only), its underlying normal or abnormal men-

tal state, is still, however, only seldom considered and elucidated. For

this reason I think that a prognosis, a prediction, on the basic of this

material is impossible. If we simply continue to observe from the

outside, to classify, to label, to correlate, etc., though we might hope

to be able to form prognoses, this remains absolutely unjustifiable

and impossible when dealing with the living human being in his

world. Perhaps it might be permissible in a veterinary practice, but

even there I doubt whether it is possible or reliable. Perhaps it may

be possible for fauna and flora, but not for living people. And apart

from its being impermissible, it is not even necessary, because in my

view it can and must be done differently. In the Netherlands we have

been able to profit by the particularly fortunate circumstance that we

were given the opportunity by our Government to submit about

1,000 recidivists during the past six years to a thorough clinical

examination. Each of them was very closely observed daily for a

period of six weeks to two or three months, by a staff of male and

female nurses, while psychiatrists, psychologists, a physician, and

social workers were able to carry out their very precise examinations

against the background of a carefully prepared anamnesis of the man

(woman) him (her) self, and an accurate description of the hereditary

and environmental circumstances, which were investigated by a few

members of the staff in the district where the patient lived and

worked before his detention. Unfortunately, I am not yet able to give

you details of this investigation. An institution for scientific research

Is studying this material very carefully from the psychiatric, psycho-

logical, sociological and criminological points of view, and in a few

years’ time we shall be able to issue a report. So far the most impor-

tant discovery made during the investigation has been that after

closer contact with these recidivists, very little remains of the divi-

stons, classifications, classical diagnosing, labelling and typologies,

and, moreover, many of the diagnoses which we made in the begin-

ning had to be reviewed during the examination or later. Fresh

factors, however, have come to light, which give us food for further

thought and which, in my view, justify my taking a stand against the

too crude stating of superficial diagnoses and the all-too-easy

assumption of the existence of endogeny, psychopathy and other

.

incurable conditions. I will

give you some examples.

1. If one wishes to spe

ak of hereditary constitutional endogeny,

one must be sure that th

e factors, dispositions or conditions labelled

by this weighty word, a

re really endogenous, that is to say, not also

psychogenous, sociogen

ous, etc. Careful biological internal examina-

121

tions, and especially comparison with control materials, where recidi-

vists were excluded, had already caused us to feel some doubts about

this. The fact that modern genetics left us completely in the lurch,

both as regards the heredity of mental factors and—to a great extent

—as regards the heredity of physical data, convinced us that the en-

dogenous factor (due to discouragement in connection with the com-

plicated nature of this problem or to defeatism in connection with

the persistence of recidivism?) is grossly over-estimated. Stanciu

(France) rightly points out—although unfortunately not always on

equally strong grounds—the dubiousness of disposition as fate.

Goethe’s words are very applicable here: “Was du ererbt von deinen

Vitern hast, erwirb es um es zu besitzen’’. In an accurate anamnesis,

going back as far as birth, psychogeny and sociogeny cannot be

separated from any possible components of predisposition.

There are, of course, conditions in which endogeny, the constitu-

tional factor, seems to prevail to such an extent that psychogeny and

sociogeny are hardly worth considering. We know of people who

suffer from these conditions, but in forensic practice we seldom or

never see them. They are usually already in an institution before they

can do any harm, or they are admitted there after they have come

into collision with the law. The Mental Health Services, however

faulty they still are, have usually tracked down these spectacular

cases and safeguarded them against themselves and society.

2. The diagnosis of psychopathy. If we start from the clinical

medical concept of psychopathy—a constitutional disturbance of the

emotional life and of the volitional qualities, etc.—it appears after

a careful multidisciplinary diagnosis of the 100 persons admitted to

the hospital as psychopathic, a diagnosis usually based purely on

disturbances of conduct and therefore, medically speaking, very pre-

mature and often incorrect, that only 10 at the most were psycho-

pathic in a strict sense; 90 or more of those who were termed psycho-

paths, owing to disturbances of conduct, turned out not to be so,

though the disturbances in adaptation, from which these delinquents

suffered, showed strong resemblance to the symptoms of the original

conceptions of psychopathy. Dukor (Switzerland) already has some

doubts about the easy manner in which Frey (Switzerland) handles

the terms endogeny and psychopathy. There are indeed further

grounds for very grave doubts. The figures I have quoted here are,

unfortunately, rather arbitrary, the more so since I myself, in view of

what I stated about endogeny under paragraph 1, feel more and more

doubtful as regards the justifiability of the diagnosis of psychopathy,

so that statistics really are repugnant to me. If, however, I endeavour

to adopt the point of view of a critical psychiatric hospital in its atti-

122

tude to cases which it diagnoses as psychopathic, and if I try to carry

out a diagnosis from that angle, then the number I mentioned above

certainly is justified. These cases, amounting approximately to 10 per

cent, which come under the heading of psychopathic, show to the

unprejudiced investigator, who does not labour under too great a

desire to label and classify, a complex of endogenous, psychogenous

and sociogenous factors, where the somatic diencephalic disturbances

besides the hereditary, anamnestic and other data apparently prevail

to such an extent that for the moment one must admit that endogeny

predominates. Apart from this, we have the question whether it will

ever be possible to separate endogeny on the one hand and psycho-

geny and sociogeny on the other. Further scientific research, which

will be costly both in time and trouble, will shed more light on this

question.

3. Another constitutional factor, mental deficiency, which unfor-

tunately in criminology is still regarded as a very important ‘“‘cause”

of criminal conduct, according to our investigations is seldom or

never a cause of recidivism in the sense in which it is being discussed

at this Congress. Of the 100 recidivists detained in the hospital under

this diagnosis, more than 90 proved not to be mentally deficient,

though earlier reports often gave an Intelligent Quotient far below

100. The I.Q. was erroneously taken as a measure of the extent of

constitutional disturbance. We are, however, convinced that the 1.Q.

of mentally disturbed or neglected human beings has hardly any more

value than the body temperature in somatic medicine. The rise in

temperature shown by the thermometer only indicates that the orga-

nism is disturbed, diseased. The unbiased diagnosis only begins after

this degree of fever has been determined. Why do so many psychia-

trists and psychologists still think that the level of the 1.Q. in itself

is the actual diagnosis? For a low 1.Q. should only be regarded as an

incentive towards beginning a more thorough diagnosis, which

should include the entire personality. One would then become less

rash in diagnosing mental deficiency, and would form less black

prognoses and, finally, be less liable to therapeutic defeatism or

nihilism. Among the pseudo-psychopaths as well as among the

pseudo-mentally deficient, who account for 85 per cent to 95 per cent

of all the cases coming in under these diagnoses, we found an enor-

mous variety of types and of bodily disfunctions, psychogenous and

endogenous factors, character deviations, etc., as well as different

diagnoses from the angle of psychiatry in a narrower sense, and of

social pathology.

4. The insanis moralis, fortunately rejected by my compatriot

Wiersma, too; the “anethopathy” of the otherwise eminent forensic

123

psychiatrist, Karpman (U.S.); so-called amorphia, emotional dull-

ness, etc.: all these on further investigation turn out to be mock-

phenomena, masks, armours, screens, concealing an entirely different

personality. Henderson (U.K.) and Cleckley (U.S.) rightly speak of a

“mask of sanity”’, a mask of quasi-normality, which enables the

swindler to swindle most of us, which causes the sexually disturbed

person to be dubbed a beast and a criminal, and the violent criminal

to be called brutal; but behind it all, modern clinical psychology,

which probes through the armour and discovers an enormous wealth

of shades in emotions underneath this crust, has discovered there 1s a

frightened, over-sensitive, distorted, battered, wounded, over-

irritable human being, often possessing a temperament that is very

warm and richly varied, though too delicate, with strong feelings of

inferiority and, particularly, of loneliness, and an over-severe—often

pathological—conscience, which tragically has led to such objection-

able, immoral and abject behaviour.

5. The fairy-tale, the myth of the professional criminal, like the

habitual criminal (this word is scarcely heard any more) and the

professional prostitute, is a relic of the time of the “Psychologie ohne

Seele”. Here, too, appearances have been deceptive. No young man,

in view of the many ways open to him of becoming a self-respecting

and respected citizen, chooses the profession of burglar, sexual delin-

quent or murderer. The essential difference between the man with a

normal profession and the recidivist is that the former chooses his

profession more or less as a calling, or manages to find a definite

occupation within the bounds of normal social activities, whereas in

the case of the so-called professional criminal his asocial conduct is

always and invariably due to hurt pride, disappointment, frustration,

resentment, etc. Perhaps the real professional criminal does exist, but,

like Andersen (Belgium), Sutherland (U.S.), Barnes (U.S.), and

Teeters (U.S.), I fear that he will be found among the remaining

95 per cent of humanity, and not among the handful of delinquents

continually in prison, longing, as we do, for freedom.

6. Neglect (which includes pampering), proved indeed to be an

important factor. Whether it is the cause will presumably be shown

only in the distant future by control investigations on a large scale.

These investigations must be carried out by different specialists in

different fields. This neglect results in emotional distortion, an inca-

pacity for affection, and backwardness in intelligence. (Even with an

I. Q. of, for instance, 130, we often see little of a really normal intelli-

gence, unless we limit it to the proficiency required by the school).

It also produced compulsive repetition, which usually appears to have

a neurotic foundation, and leads one to wonder what connection

124

there may be between neglect and neurosis, a problem of the first

importance in modern psychiatry and psychotherapy. In these

neglected and neurotic persons, in addition to compulsive repetition

we often find disturbances of an evident “siichtig” or addictive

character, which probably differs more or less from the compulsive

repetition. In every case the lack of freedom of the personality is

typical. This means the person is incapable of responsibility and is led

again and again into recidivism. This improverishment of the per-

sonality correlates also with the poverty of many other facets; in the

case of swindlers we are led to think of the ‘“‘schablonenhafte” i1m-

agination (thinking in clichés)—whereas the layman, on the contrary,

thinks that swindlers possess such a rich imagination; Alexander

Belgium), in his subtle report, gives a very good account of these

typically poor types.

7. Lastly—which does not mean that there is not a great deal more

to which I might call your attention—Ilastly, I would like to refer to a

remarkable discovery which has struck us, and others before us as

well, namely, that the criminal records of these persons are not homo-

geneous. Among a series of economic offences one may find an

aggressive or a sexual offence, or both, and when a criminal record

does happen to be homogeneous, thorough psychiatric, psychological

and social investigation nevertheless indicates that there are also

deep-lying disturbances in the other spheres of the personality. In the

economic delinquent there are, for instance, disturbances in the

sphere of power or in the sexual sphere, whether or not these have led

to manifestations in the corresponding spheres of life, and have or

have not ended in punishment by the community. The entire per-

sonality is in question, and the difficulty is that this personality has

to live in a community. The social possibilities, the social sentiments

and the mode of contact, are often considerably disturbed, so that

mock-contacts and mock-satisfactions create an increasingly vicious

circle, whilst feelings of guilt and the need for punishment also play

their part as the result of the structure of the paradoxical personality

referred to above. The recidivist consequently clashes again and

again with the community.

Is all this disease, disturbance? I do not know. The case is seldom

or never purely psychiatric in the classical sense (the diagnostic

scheme of Kraepelin), so that we see few psychoses, and even less

oligophrenies and real psychopathies. (Do they really exist, or do

they belong partly to a social collective concept, dependent on place,

time and civilisation, partly to the consequences of the defects of an

organic nature (post-encephalitic, post-traumatic?). We do meet

with borderline cases, of which there was such an excellent descrip-

125

tion recently in the British Journal of Delinquency. Are the rest, then,

neuroses? Unfortunately, we do not know exactly what are neuroses

and what are not. The neurosis concept is still constantly changing

and really causes the same difficulties as the psychosis concept, which

is also partly a social-juridical concept, while the conditions leading

to psychosis are so extremely varied that comparisons become diffi-

cult. It is a well-known fact that formerly 80 per cent of the persons

suffering from the so-called psychoses were put into asylums, and

20 per cent of them in the so-called open institutions, whereas nowa-

days these proportions are reversed. Everything is constantly chang-

ing; we cannot say anything for certain. It is dangerous to rely on

labels, classification, etc. Above all, let us make a structural diagnosis

from case to case, and keep our minds open to the endless and

inexhaustible possibilities of the structure of the personality, and

especially of the personality whose adaptability is disturbed.

But how, then, do matters stand? In general one could say that for

the optimal functioning of man in society, an integration and a fine

regulation of a great variety of biological, somatic and psychical

components are necessary. Such an integration and regulation are

necessary if the individual is to hold his own in the world in his inter-

actions with other people, and to take part in it in a positive sense as

well. Owing to the normal and adequate development of factors,

which at present we clumsily explain in concepts of intellect, feeling,

intuition, instinct, emotionality, etc.—though it is only through con-

tact with others that these become facets of the entire personality of

the individual in his interaction with the world—an infinitely fine

combination of factors is created, a regulative system and organism,

capable of realising intangible concepts such as love of one’s neigh-

bour, fidelity, responsibility, feeling of guilt, etc. Here most decidedly

the concepts “good” and “evil”’ come to the fore, just because man is

a human being in his world. These concepts ‘“good” and “‘evil”,

which predominated in psychiatry 150 years ago, have since been

banished from Medicine, owing to the influence of materialism and

natural science. Now they appear again, on a higher level and in a

significant way, not separated from natural science but integrated in

it. We see, strangely enough, how in somatic medicine, owing to the

influence of better and more general medical care, social insurance

laws, etc., the conception of responsibility (the basis of accountabil-

ity in the Penal Code) takes on new aspects. As the result of greed,

obstinacy, conceit, pedantry, stupidity, carelessness, rebelliousness,

even the best medical measures may be frustrated. The insured person

must suffer for this, unless he is made in such a way that he can recog-

nise all this evil as his own work; as something wrong for which

126

he is responsible, and therefore something for which he is to blame.

So it appears that in psychical matters any one with a well-balanced

and sensitive regulative mechanism who chooses evil and not good,

is accordingly called to account and punished, as being responsible

for his actions. It may be, however, that the one who did wrong, did

not happen to possess such a highly integrated regulative mechanism

that the development of responsibility and therefore of accountability

was possible. And here, according to us, the factor of neglect comes

into play. In the same way as organic neglect—lack of vitamins,

albumen, carbohydrates, fats, calories, iron, nitrogen and innumer-

able other constituents—can have most serious and disastrous results

for normal development, the shortage of constituents indispensable

for the normal development of the psychical personality, such as love,

affection, warmth, cherishing, safety, etc., can have the most marked

and disastrous results. In the same way as the body, the psychical

personality can remain defective or can become distorted and acquire

all kinds of other symptoms which make it impossible to accept

responsibility like the average person, to love one’s neighbour,

to be faithful, etc. All these things can be seen in an endless number

of so-called normal beings, who never come into contact with the

psychiatrist or the judge. They can be seen, however, most frequently

in criminals in general, and in recidivists in particular. Is this disease,

is this disturbance? I do not know. All these people have once been

newly-born babies and young children, undoubtedly with their con-

stitutional factors like all of us. They grew up as we did, although

often under much worse circumstances. But strangely enough, there

were only a few of them, mostly from families which suffered

seriously from heredity and environmental conditions, who became

recidivists. If we, who are responsible for them as fellow-men, not

only observe them but also try to penetrate deeply into their inner

selves, we see how different they all are, how inadequate typologies

are, how unproved the somatic hypotheses, how all further psychia-

tric, psychological, as well as sociological speculations about the

grouping of recidivists, must fail. Undoubtedly they have elements in

common, but that does not in the least justify a typology. In psy-

chiatry, this temptation to label and to classify has produced its

serious and painful revenge. The scheme of Kraepelin has fallen to

bits and psychiatry begins to realise how deeply it has wronged and

still wrongs the patients. In forensic psychiatry, it ministers to the

vicious circle of recidivism and therefore also sins against the legal

order. Recidivists undoubtedly have this in common, that they can-

not accept responsibility for the part they play in society. Is this un-

willingness? But why don’t they lead their lives in such a way that

127

they at least can keep the freedom they so ardently desire? We, too,

have found, as Alexander (Belgium) puts it, these remarkable results

in connection with the lack of freedom and compulsive repetition.

Alexander assumes—as we do—that psycho-analysis has done epoch-

making work, but it is not only psycho-analysis that has made dis-

coveries here. I point to the new directions in children’s psychology

and children’s pedagogy. Wiersma (Netherlands)—although he gives

a good and clear account of this point—doubts the value of the

psycho-analytical insight. This is all the more strange, because as a

characteristic of recidivism he does see the tendency to compulsion

and also ‘‘das Schablonenhafte”, the repetition of actions whose

similarity is even often a clue which the police can make use of. We

have already mentioned the poor, dry imagination of the “fantasts”

and the swindlers, the ‘“‘schablonenhafte” pitiableness of their eternal

tricks. And could not precocity, Di Tullio (Italy) and Frey (Switzer-

land), shallowness, Di Tullio and Alexander (Belgium), and the

seriousness of symptoms (which justifies this Congress) bear some

relation to what psycho-analysis indicated in connection with the

early development of the personality?

As regards the causal factors of recidivism, a practically un-

touched, but promising, field lies open. We are convinced that in this

field still many important discoveries will be made in the future.

As possible “causal” factors Stanciu (France) mentions the judi-

ciary, the criminal record and mistakes in probation. S. Bates (U.S.),

Martinez (Cuba), Wiersma (Netherlands) and Hadzi (Yugoslavia)

mention imprisonment. In a fine and sensitive report the latter shows

the factors tending towards recidivism which may result from pro-

bation inadequately carried out, and he suggests a system for the

avoidance of mishaps. Indeed, serious mishaps can occur as early as

in the police stage, as well as in the judicial stage, and may lay the

foundation of recidivism with the first offender, although of course it

is not, generally speaking, so simple, because here, too, personality

(and therefore predisposition), sociogenic and psychogenic factors

play a part. An unwise judiciary may completely suppress nascent

feelings of guilt, which cannot express themselves because they are

smothered by the sense¢ of immediate danger, the fear of punishment

and the dislocation brought about by the decd. In this way, unassimi-

lated feelings of guilt and unsolved complexes of guilt continue to

smoulder under a crust of self-defence, resentment, spitc and fear.

The Public Prosecutor, like the Judge, can destroy by exaggeration or

by too great a severity these tentative beginnings of realisation and

feelings of guilt. Parental figures must be strict. The family and the

legal order must be safeguarded, for in the family as well.as in society

128

their attitude must be primarily one of acceptance, and they must

never repulse anyone. Who are they, that they have the right to do

so, considering their responsibility for their fellow-men? In prison,

as well as during judicial proceedings, methods of treatment that

are inadequate, inexpert, loveless, too severe or too mild, can create

all sorts of possibilities, which the delinquent adopts to project his

unassimilated feelings of guilt on others. An over-severe regime, the

exclusion from the outer world, the senseless daily round, the bad

treatment, insufficient, inadequate work and the abnormal situation

of prison communities, all give insufficient opportunity for the feel-

ings of guilt to ripen and to be assimilated, or for the offender to live

through the crime committed, and to reach a catharsis. For the re-

growth of the delinquent in the world depends on the development

and solving of the normal, but a fortiori of the pathological, feeling

of guilt. And to bring about such a development and solution, an

understanding and extremely expert attitude and approach are

needed. Unsolved feelings of guilt tend on the one hand towards the

repetition of forbidden actions within the framework of a guilt-

punishment-complex, on the other hand, to that crust formation that

brings about a mask of sanity and turns the delinquent into a quasi-

hardened criminal. This mask makes us think that the man is be-

having quietly and normally, forgetting that normal behaviour in

such an abnormal setting really means little or nothing. Here is an

enormous field for scientific study and practical experiments by

which the problem of recidivism can be brought to a proper solution.

Martinez (Cuba) in his report shows how comparatively simple in-

novations, that are at the same time very attractive and daring within

the framework of a still rather primitive prison system, can bring

about enormous improvements in recidivism. He shows us anew how

to tackle this problem with courage: the suitable punishment or

treatment must satisfy two criteria. On the one hand it must take into

account the very personal idiosyncratic nature of the rather excep-

tional individual who, presumably owing to his emotional disturb-

ances, fails in his respect for the legal order. On the other hand,

after satisfactory examination and diagnosis, it must above all things

provide an opportunity for the feelings of guilt of the delinquent to

ripen and be dissolved, and give him the chance to make up for his

crimes by adequate adaptation to society. There he can make

amends, whilst society also needs to make amends for so much to

him. And, as Hadzi (Yugoslavia) shows, it will be of the utmost

importance to create a system for the termination of imprisonment

so that it is possible to end it at any time at the optimal moment,

and to replace it by a conditional or unconditional release, or by some

129

CC—1

form of treatment. (S. Bates, U.S.A.) Even more than good institu-

tions we need good, multidisciplinary, expert, scientifically trained,

adaptable personnel, since a bad institution with a bad staff can

provide a strong impetus towards recidivism. We can only be freed

from this problem when all this has been attained, after we have

actually met the delinquent. An attitude which classifies human

beings like so many animals and plants must produce hopelessly

wrong diagnoses and prognoses, and as a reaction to such a sterile

contact, the victim becomes paralysed and so tends to become a

recidivist. If we primarily diagnose psychopathy, amorphia, etc., then

he will tend to produce this situation. If, however, we approach the

offender from an unprejudiced, accepting attitude as a fellow-man,

our recognition of his individuality will not fail to draw out his

individuality, though perhaps only after much patience and repeated

efforts. Our confidence will finally reveal, slowly but surely, the still

unimpaired responsibility under the ruined personality, and make

him susceptible to a therapeutic approach which ought to be appli-

cable in prisons as well as in therapeutic institutions; no threats, no

enmity, but an approach which accepts him as a fellow-creature, both

during the judicial stage and during the execution of the punishment

or treatment. In this procedure, based on a sense of common

humanity, the lawyer, psychiatrist, psychologist, sociologist and

social worker must be combined in a team, at a level where all of

them have outgrown narrow professionalism, moved as they are by

their compassion for their fellow-man who has sinned against the

legal order, which, too, is in need of tolerance. The report of Hermon,

concerning a state (Israel) where the penal and penitentiary systems

have not been burdened by years of prejudice and rigid systems,

contains a wealth of data, all pointing in this direction. And the

report of Karanicas (Greece) and many others point in this direc-

tion, too. The view of Alexander (Belgium), Bomboire (Belgium),

Mackwood (U.K.) and many others, and finally the conclusions of

our Dutch investigations (in Utrecht and Groningen) agree virtually,

if not completely.

After all this, it will not surprise you that I regard it as unjust to

make recidivism a reason for increasing the length of punishment—

as happens, for instance, in the Dutch Penal Code. On the contrary,

if we wish to find the solution we must get rid of this misunderstanding

as soon as possible. If careful observation, accurate selection before

relegation to differentiated prisons and institutions, and careful, very

expert treatment by large staffs of psychiatrists, psychologists, socio-

logists, ministers of religion, social workers, together with good

nursing and penitentiary personnel, are all linked closely with a well-

130

thought-out and expert after-care, then, according to our firm convic-

tion, strengthened by our practical experience, we shall be able to

find a beginning to the solution of the problem of recidivism, which

is so harmful to society. The heavy expense entailed by the appoint-

ment of such personnel is absolutely justified, since it is a fraction of

the amount which recidivism costs the community. In the Nether-

lands, owing to the far-sightedness of our Government and its clear

understanding of the constant development of science, what is

virtually a test-laboratory for experimentation in the above-men-

tioned sense has been created in the combination of the Psychiatric

Observation Clinic, the Selection-Institute, various institutions for

treatment and a fast-developing, expert system of after-care in the

limited area of our small country. In the recently opened hospital for

the treatment of mentally-disturbed delinquents (mostly recidivists),

the “Dr. H. van der Hoeven Kliniek™ in Utrecht, many of the prin-

ciples of the Tavistock Clinic (Dr. Sutherland, Dr. Dicks, Dr.

Bowlby), the Cassel Hospital (Dr. Main), Belmont Hospital (Dr.

Maxwell Jones), H.M. Prison, Wormwood Scrubs (Dr. Landers,

Dr. Simpson, Dr. MacPhail), and also of Dr. Sivadon, near Paris,

have been taken over, and we have also been stimulated by the

inspiring ideas of the Howard League as well as by the example of the

Institute for the Scientific Treatment of Delinquency (Dr. Mannheim

and Dr. Carroll), and of eminent psychiatrists like Dr. Glover and

Professor Henderson, to mention only a few of the most important,

in this hospitable country. But we must not only include the reci-

divists in this “laboratory”. Particularly juvenile and first offenders

urgently need our attention and care, because they may, unfor-

tunately, be potential recidivists.

May I end by expressing the hope that these ideas contain sufficient

truth to contribute to the solution of the problem of recidivism, and

that the curative element of this work may bear fruit in the preventive

element of forensic psychiatry and penitentiary and penal science,

so that the Mental Health Services can benefit by it, and many of

those who become criminals, and who yet represent so small a per-

centage of humanity, may in the future be able to remain out of the

arms of the law.

131

SECTION 1V

PRONOSTICO DEL RECIDIVISMO

por Israel Drapkin

Es indudable que una de las mayores dificultades para enfocar

el prondstico del recidivismo radica en nuestro desconocimiento de

los criterios rectores que han orientado las ponencias de los Relatores

Generales que se han ocupado de los otros aspectos del recidivismo,

muy en particular el relacionado con su definicidon. En efecto, como

también lo observa Van Bemmelen (10), existen diversos criterios

juridicos para apreciar el caracter de recidivista de un delincuente y

la legislacion de los distintos paises no es uniforme en la definicién del

delito, ni en la clasificacion de los delitos, ni en la distincidon entre

faltas y delitos, etc. Por estos motivos, suele suceder que el volumen

y la naturaleza de la reincidencia varia de un lugar a otro por concep-

tos puramente legales. Sin embargo, ante la imperiosa necesidad de

basar nuestro trabajo sobre un presupuesto determinado, podriamos

admitir, en términos generales, que el recidivismo es la actividad rei-

terada y persistentemente antogdnica a las disposiciones legales

vigentes en cada pais.

Del mismo modo, los conceptos relativos a las causas y a las

formas clinicas del recidivismo varian extraordinariamente entre los

diversos autores. En estas condiciones, estimamos inoportuna e in-

adecuada nuestra incursidn en estos aspectos, maxime cuando ellos

son de la competencia y responsabilidad de otros Relatores

Generales. Por lo tanto, nos concretaremos especificamente a enfocar

los problemas relativos al prondstico del recidivismo, entendiendo

como tal la determinacion de la mayor o menor probabilidad que tiene

un delincuente para continuar en una actividad reiterada y persistente-

mente antagdnica a las disposiciones legales vigentes en cada pais.

En nuestros trabajos e investigaciones clinicas, realizados en el

Instituto de Criminologia de Chile, designamos por “indice de peli-

grosidad” al prondstico del recidivismo concebido en los términos

indicados.

132

La infinita cantidad y complejidad de los factores que intervienen

en la determinacidon del prondstico, asi como la diversidad de cri-

terios con que los distintos autores enfocan este problema, han resul-

tado en una gran variedad de técnicas de indole muy heterogénea.

Con todo, es posible concretar las directivas generales solo a dos:

aquellas que se cifien fundamentalmente a un punto de vista clinico,

valorando las posibilidades de cada delincuente individualmente con-

siderado, de acuerdo con sus peculiaridades genéticas y dinamicas; y

aquellas otras que establecen el prondstico en consonancia con

“tablas de prediccion” previamente elaboradas, en las que se con-

sideran exclusivamente algunos factores— denominados “predic-

tores’ — que se han demostrado estadisticamente significativos en

esta materia.

Debemos reconocer y admitir que ambos métodos no son estric-

tamente antagonicos. Asi como para la confeccion y aplicacion de las

“tablas de prediccon” interviene una determinada cantidad de infor-

macion clinica o ‘‘subjetiva”, en el método clinico se aprovechan

también diversos antecedentes estadisticos. Pero, para las necesidades

especificas de este trabajo, hemos considerado preferible mantener

una acentuada distincion pragmatica entre ambos procedimientos.

Como nuestro distin guido amigo y colega el Prof. Sheldon Glueck es

una de las autoridades mas reconocidas en el campo de la prediccion

de tipo estadistico y también Co-Relator General en este mismo tema,

tenemos las seguridad mas absoluta que reune las majores condi-

ciones para representar magnificamente los postulados y la impor-

tancia de esta corriente metodoldgica. Por nuestra parte, basados en

nuestra experiencia personal, primordialmente clinica, nos limitare-

mos a tratar de expresar, en la mejor forma que nos sea posible, los

puntos de vista sostenidos por los autores de los trabajos que se

orientan en esta misma direccién, pero respetando siempre las ideas

y los conceptos propios de cada uno de ellos,

%k

*

%k

De los trabajos sometidos a nuestra consideracién, el de Van

Bemmelen (10) y el de Valdes y Valdes (9), enfocan el problema del

prondstico del recidivi

smo en sus lineas generales. Los de Pinatel (6),

Scott (7) y Ta

ylor (8) analizan diversas caracteristicas bioldgicas,

psicolégicas y

sobre

sociolégicas de los recidivistas que tienen repercusion

Su pronostico. Por sy

parte, los de Mackwood (2) y Cannat (1)

extraen refe

con divers

rencias pronésticas de los resultados que han obtenido

as medidas terapéuticas aplicadas a delincuentes reci-

divistas. L

os trabajos de Ohlin (4) y Monachesi (3), de los Estados

133

Unidos, y el de Wilkins (11), de Inglaterra, junto con hacer una

resefla de la evolucidn que han tenido los métodos y criterios segui-

dos para la construccion y el empleo de las “tablas de prediccion™

en sus respectivos paises, sugieren nuevos procedimientos para su

perfeccionamiento. Finalmente Overbeck (5) hace un estudio critico

de las mismas “tablas de prediccion’, enfocado principalmente desde

el punto de vista de su posible aplicacion practica por los magistrados

encargados de los procesos penales.

x

x

%*

Pareceria existir un consenso bastante generalizado como para

admitir que entre el 30 y el 409, de los delincuentes adultos conde-

nados en diversos paises europeos, son recidivistas (Van Bemmelen—

Pinatel). En Latino América serian también valederas estas mismas

cifras. La reincidencia en Cuba alcanzaria un 409, en los diversos

tipos de delincuentes, segun el Laboratorio Central de Antropologia

Penitenciaria (Valdes y Valdes). Por nuestra parte podemos afirmar

que en Chile alrededor del 309, de los condenados son recidivistas.

Estas cifras nos prueban el volumen mas o menos constante y general

del recidivismo y, por ende, la magnitud no despreciable de este

problema.

En contraposicion con la aceptacion tan extendida de este hecho,

existe una extraordinaria falta de concordancia entre los autores para

indicar los factores que tienen effectivamente un significado pronos-

tico y para la valoracion de la mayor o menor importancia de los

mismos. Esta falta de concordancia se observa tanto en los estudios

de tipo clinico, como en la construccidn y la aplicacion de las “tablas

de prediccion”. Es natural que asi se toma en consideracion el in-

menso numero y la extrema complejidad de los factores que pueden

intervenir en la determinacion de este pronostico.

Solo con el afan de contribuir a simplificar y sistematizar, hemos

tratado de agrupar los factores que pueden tomarse en considera-

cion para establecer un pronostico de tipo clinico siguiendo las lineas

generales de la “historia vital” del delincuente. Con este criterio,

donde el orden de precedencia no implica en modo alguno un orden

de importancia, los primeros factores que deberian considerarse son

los comunmente denominados “hereditarios”. Luego tendriamos los

antecedentes que pueden englobarse en el rubro general de factores

66

“sociales”, entre los cuales valdria la pena distinguir los

ami-

liares” de los ‘““personales”. Entre estos Gltimos se podrian diferen-

ciar los antecedentes ‘‘infantiles”, los ‘‘escolares, los ‘“‘occupa-

cionales”, los “militares”, los ‘“socio-afectivos’ (intereses y afini-

134

dad des sexuales, conyugales, amistosos, recreativos, etc.) y los *““pena-

les y penitenciarios’. Entre estos ultimos deben distinguirse “los deli-

tos y la experiencia carcelaria anteriores” de todo lo relacionado

con el “delito actual™, por el cual el sujeto esta detenido, procesado

o condenado.

En segundo lugar deberian tomarse en consideracion todos los

resultados que es posible obtener del “exdmen actual de la perso-

nalidad del delincuente” sea desde el punto de vista “morfologico™,

% ¢

3

“fisio-patologico

b

psicologico y neuro-psiquidtrico”, etc.

Por ultimo, seria indispensable tener presente los diversos ele-

mentos referentes al ““tratamiento penitenciareo y a las condiciones

al egreso’’, cuando el delincuente se ubique nuevamente en el medio

social, sea en forma libre o controlada.

El cuadro siguiente indica esquematicamente lo anteriormente

€Xpuesto:

EE———

Resultados

Tratamiento

Antecedentes

del examen actual

penitenciario

de la historia vital

de la personalidad

y condiciones

del delincuente

al egreso

I. Antecedentes

I

I

Tratamiento

Morfolégico.

héréditarios

penitenciario:

II. Antecedentes

(a) previo al egre-

sociales:

II

Fisio-patolo-

SO;

A. Familiares

gico.

(b) después del

B. Personales.

égreso.

1. Infantiles;

2. Escolares;

ITII. Psicolégico y

II. Condiciones al

3. Ocupacionales;

Neuro-Psiquia-

egreso:

4. Militares;

trico.

(a) personales;

5. Socio-afectivos;

IV. Otros exa-

(b) sociales.

6. Penales y Pe-

menes.

nitenciarios:

(a) anteriores;

(b) actuales.

Este esbozo de siste

matizacion no constituye una clasificacion

en cad

rigida e inflexible para

los multiples elementos que pueden incluirse

a uno de sus rubrog principales, los cuales tampoco limitan el

numer

0y el valor de sus factores integrantes. Por el contrario, nos

135

parece que es lo suficientemente elastico y ductil como para permitir

su ampliacidn, reducciéon o modificacion, pero conservando siempre

las caracteristicas fundamentales de su estructura basica.

Estimamos necesario anticipar que la significacion prondstica de

algunos de los factores que analizaremos a continuacidn es diveras-

mente apreciada por lo distintos autores. La mayoria de éstos se

refieren generalmente a aquellos factores que mas ensombrecen el

prondstico, de acuerdo naturalmente con su propria experiencia.

Solo excepcionalmente se mencionan algunos elementos que tienden

a mejorarlo. A este respecto nos atrevemos a sugerir la conveniencia

que existiria en envestigar mas detenidamente los factores de este

ultimo tipo, lo cual podria contribuir a la ampliacién y multiplica-

cion de aquellas condiciones terapé uticas mas favorables para evitar

el recidivismo.

De acuerdo con lo anteriormente expresado y en la imposibilidad

material de referimos a la totalidad de los factores que pueden inter-

venir en la formulacidon de un pronéstico del recidivismo, nos limi-

taremos a analizar exclusivamente y en forma somera, a aquellos

indicados en los diversos trabajos presentados a la consideracion de

esta Seccion del Congreso. Incorporaremos también algunos resul-

tados que parecen desprenderse de nuestra experiencia personal

recogida en el Instituto de Criminologia de Chile.

ANTECEDENTES DE LA HISTORIA VITAL DEL

DELINCUENTE

1

Antecedentes hereditarios: El trabajo de Valdes y Valdes (9),

siguiendo las linéas generales de Exner en la valoracién de los ante-

cedentes comunmente denominados “hereditarios’ que tienen signi-

ficacion prondstica, se refiere a la importancia de las ‘“taras here-

ditarias” y de los ‘“‘antecedentes criminoldgicos familiares”, pero sin

adentrarse en mayores detalles. Igual cosa hace Van Bemmelen (10)

al mencionar los ‘“‘antecedentes psico-patologicos familiares”. Pinatel

(6), en cambio, distingue los “antecedentes psico-patolégicos fami-

liares™ (psicosis, epilépsia, suicidio, etc.), de los “antecedentes mor-

bidos familiares” (sifilis, tuberculosis, etc.), del ‘alcoholismo

familiar” y de los ‘“‘antecedentes criminoldgicos familiares’”. Por

nuestra parte, concordamos con esta distincidon, por cuanto nos

facilita la apreciacion diferenciada de cada uno de sus elementos.

136

II. Antecedentes sociales:

A. FAMILIARES

Los aspectos que se destacan en este rubro dicen relacion con la

estructura y organizacion de la familia del delincuente, su situacion

econOmica, la moralidad del hogar y su ubicacion.

Taylor (8) y Rose (7b) se refieren a la familia numerosa y al orden

de prelacion entre los hermanos, precisando éste ultimo que ambos

factores pueden ser favorables o desfavorables, segtin el caso. Pinatel

(6) menciona ademas el rol de la ilegitimidad y la condicién de hijo

unico; a esta ultima alude también Taylor (8). La importancia de la

disociacidon y consecutiva desorganizacion familiar, sea por falle-

cimiento de uno o de ambos padres, por desarmonia y posterior sepa-

racion de los mismos, o por sus prolongadas ausencias del hogar

(largas hospitalizaciones, reclusion en instituciones penales, motivos

ocupacionales, etc.), aparece adecuadamente apreciada en los

trabajos de Cannat (1), Pinatel (6), Rose (7b), y Taylor (8), especial-

mente en su relacion con el mayor o menor abandono en que quedan

los hijos. Por el contrario, Mannheim y Wilkins (7a) no encuentran

un valor pronéstico significativo a estos factores.

El bajo nivel ocupacional del padre aperece citado por Taylor (8)

y Pinatel (6) y el pauperismo y la miseria resultante, por Overbeek (5).

Este ultimo subraya también que la mala situacién econémica deter-

mina una vivienda inadecuada, estrecha, antihigiénica y promiscua,

que repercute muy desfavorablemente sobre los hijos.

La desarmonia conyugal y el alcoholismo paterno, consecutivos o

no a la miseria econdmica (8) y (6), crean un ambiente hostil o degra-

dante en el hogar, el abandono moral de los hijos, la precocidad

sexual de los mismos derivada de la promiscuidad en que viven, etc.

Clifford Shaw es indudablemente uno de los grandes precursores

en las investigaciones sobre ecologia criminoldgica. Nuestras indaga-

ciones personales también nos han permitido demostrar la existencia

en Chile de zonas o areas de mayor criminalidad, tanto urbanas

como rurales. Mannheim y Wilkins (7a) encontraron una relacién

pronostica significativa en la proveniencia de zonas industriales.

Pinatel (6) y Taylor (8) insisten sobre la influencia en general mas des-

favorables del medio urbano. Overbeek (5) otorga importancia al

barrio en que esta ubicado el hogar familiar del delincuente.

B. PERSONALES

1. Infantiles: Eq 1a primera y la segunda infancia pueden hallarse

una serie de factores de diversa repercusion sobre el prondstico. Asi,

137

la falta de un hogar estable y la vagancia prec6z, derivada de un

continuo desplazamiento residencial, ejercen nefasta influencia sobre

el futuro del menor (1); en cambio, la estabilidad familiar, residencial

y social son elementos favorables (1) y (7a). En Chile y muchos otros

paises latino-americanos, estos factores adquieren gran importancia,

debido a las condiciones econdmicas y sociales en que vive la gran

masa de la poblacion.

Bowlby fué uno de los primeros en indicar la grave repercusion

que puede tener sobre el futuro del nifio cuando éste, por cualquier

motivo se ve separado de su madre durante los primeros afios de su

vida. Lewis (7f) insiste en este aspecto, el cual también hemos com-

probado en nuestras investigaciones, en el sentido que la presencia

de tal experiencia en el pasado del sujeto ensombrece su prondstico.

El hijo tnico, excesivamente mimado, que puede desarrollar un

dependencia exagerada (8), como también aquel que no es deseado

por sus padres y experimenta su rechazo y falta de ternura (6), pueden

generar una hostilidad bien o mal inhibida, contra los padres primero

y contra las autoridades después (2) y (9), dando lugar a tendencias

agresivas y asociales (2). Por el contrario, una adecuada relacion

paterno-infantil es un elemento de prondstico favorable (7f).

2. Escolares: Pocas dudas caben acerca de las posibles conse-

cuencias negativas de una vida escolar irregular y casi todos los

autores cocuerdan en este aspecto. La educacién e instruccidn

escasas (5) y (6) o inadecuadas (2) y (9); los frecuentes cambios de

escuela (1); el progreso escolar anormal, desarménico o deficiente,

que puede causar un retardo educacional (8) y (9); el ausentismo

escolar voluntario (8) y (10); y la falta de oportunidades para con-

currir a la escuela (que se observa con cierta frecuencia en Chile y en

otros paises latino-americanos), son algunos de los aspectos mas

relevantes en esta materia. Mannheim y Wilkins (7a) non concuerdan

con la importancia que al ausentismo escolar voluntario le otorgan

otros autores, ya que en sus investigaciones este factor no demostré

poseer una significacion estadistica valedera. Por su parte, Pinatel

(6) estima, en general, que un recidivista ya formado no tendra un

prondstico mas favorables, atin cuando entre sus antecedentes no se

encuentren estos factores negativos (miseria, escolaridad irregular,

etc.)

3. Ocupacionales: Algo similar ocurre con los diversos aspectos

de la vida ocupacional del individuo. Mientras que un trabajo

especializado, regular y estable es un factor favorable para el pro-

nostico (1) y (7a), éste es desfavorable, en mayor o menor grado, en

los delincuentes en cuyas historias vitales aparecen frecuentes cam-

bios de trabajo y una clara inestabilidad ocupacional (1), (8), (9) y

138

(10). La falta de trabajo, pro crisis econémicas, abundancia de mano

de obra a cualquier otro motivo (5) y (6); el ausentismo voluntario,

por carencia de deseos o habitos de trabajo (6) y (7b); la falta de un

aprendizaje profesional systematico (6) y (9); el desempeiiar trabajos

o actividades no calificadas, que impiden un progreso satisfactorio,

como los de jornalero, gaiian, etc. (1) y (8); la falta se satisfaccion

derivada del trabajo (8); etc., son otros tantos factores que pueden

considerarse. Por nuestra parte, podemos ratificar la importancia de

muchos de estos elementos e incluir entre ellos uno que no aperece

mencionado en los trabajos analizados; la iniciacion precoz en el

trabajo.

4. Militares: Las deserciones, la ineptitud e indisciplina dentro de

los cuarteles, que indican una falta de adaptacion a la vida militar,

aparecen citadas en los trabajos de Cannat (1) y Taylor (8), respec-

tivamente.

5. Socio-afectivos: La falta de un hogar propio, formado por el

sujeto mismo, asi como una gran inestabilidad afectiva, son factores

pronosticos perniciosos; pero la formacion y mantenciéon de un hogar

y la perseverancia en los afectos, son elementos favorables (1). La

vida sexual tiene un papel preponderante tanto en la esfera conyugal

como extra-matrimonial. La inestibilidad e inconstancia en las ten-

dencias sexuales ( 10), los conflictos conyugales (8) y las perversiones

sexuales (2) ensombrecen el pronéstico. La frialidad afectiva vy

emocional (2), que complota contra el establecimiento de buenas

relaciones con el grupo social (9), produce un relativo aislamiento

del individuo por la escasez o falta de amistades (8). Taylor insiste

también en el valor pronodstico negativo de los intereses personales

superficiales y égoistas, ajenos o contrarios a los intereses del grupo

o la comunidad, lo que también podemos suscribir, de acuerdo con

la experiencia chilena. La importancia del alcoholismo como factor

pronostico desfavorable es superlativa (7a), (9) y (10), particular-

mente en aquellos paises de gran produccidn vinicola.

6. Penales y Penitenciarios anteriores: Entre los antecedentes de

este tipo, anteriores a la actual condena, que se destacan por su valor

pronostico, se podrian mencionar: la edad de la iniciacion delictiva

(7?),.(8) y (9), factor que se agravaria en los casos en que la carrera

criminal comienza antes de los 18 afios; el nimero de delitos cometi-

dos, ya que con su incremento se produciria una mayor habituacion

Y una menor resistencia al crimen (10); la duracién de la actividad

delictiva, especialmente cuando la reincidencia se sucede rapida-

mente y existe un desplazamiento frecuente de los lugares en que se

cometen los delitos— “nomadismo criminal”’—(9); y el nimero de

condenas sufridas por el delincuente (7a), (7b), (8) y (10), especial-

139

mente cuando son mas de cuatro (9), con acostumbriamento con-

secutivo a la vida en establecimientos penales (1) y de efecto

similar a la que produce la experiencia individual en instituciones

diversas desde la infancia (8). Es necesario advertir que Rose (7b) no

lagra establecer un valor prondstico significativo a la edad de la

iniciacion delictiva ni al numero de delitos cometidos. Por su parte,

Benson (7g) acepta la influencia de la duracion de la actividad delic-

tiva, pero sefiala que elle va disminuyendo progresivamente con la

edad del delincuente.

En cuanto al tipo de los delitos anteriormente cometidos, Van

Bemmelen (10) sostiene que aquellos que iniciaron tempranamente su

carrera delictiva con hurtos domésticos y callejeros, tienen peor

prondstico; que éste también es desfavorable en aquellos casos en

que, después de una larga actividad criminal, se dan a la vagancia,

por falta de estabilidad residencial; que lo mismo sucede con los

delincuentes profesionales en atentados contra la propriedad, que

posteriormente suelen comete delitos sexuales; y que no tendrian la

misma importancia los atentados contra al autoridad, los que se

relacionarian mas directamente con el alcoholismo que con la activi-

dad criminal propriamente tal. Mannheim y Wilkins (7a), por su

parte, alegan que el tipo de delito no tendria una significacion pro-

nostica precisa. Mackwood (2), a su vez, afirma que, cuando en el

profesional del delito se constatan perversiones, penadas o n6 por la

ley, ello ensombrece el prondstico. Nuestra experiencia en relacion

con este tema nos ha permitido observar como un delito de hurto

de animales (abigeato) predispone a otro del mismo tipo y también la

frecuencia con que encontramos el profesionalismo en el terreno de

los delitos contra la propiedad, muy en particular en el rubro de la

falsificacion de documentos mercantiles, estafas y similar. En Chile,

donde por excepcion se ejecuta al homicida, no es sin embargo

frecuente encontrar este tipo de reincidencia especifica.

Penales y Penitenciarios actuales: Las circunstancias que rodean

la comision del delito por el cual el sujeto esta bajo observacion, tam-

bién desempefia un rol en la configuracion final del prondstico. Este

sera mas favorable si la ocasionalidad es genuina y real (5) y (6); lo

contrario sucede si la ocasion fué deliberadamente buscada por el

delincuente, actuando individualmente o formando parte de un

grupo o “pandilla” (6). Los factores psicodindmicos que han actuado

en la comision del delito, ya se trate de conflictos neurdticos o de

compensacion, o de propositos utilitarios y de lucro, tendran diversa

ponderacion prondstica, segin el caso (6). Lo mismo sucede con la

actitud post-delictual que asuma el autor del delito, variando con sus

reacciones de indiferencia o insensibilidad, el remordimiento, la

140

entrega espontinea a la autoridad, la fuga y ocultamiento, etc. (1)

y (6).

Nuestras observaciones coinciden con las de Taylor (8) en la

apreciacion de la actitud del penado frente a su condena y el valor

que ella tiene para el prondstico. Este variara si la actitud es de indi-

ferencia y sometimiento o de rebeldia y resentimiento. Los efectos

psicologicos de la penacastigo son analizados por Cannat (1) y

Van Bemmelen (10). También atribuimos valor prondstico a la

naturaleza de las relaciones que guarda el recluido con su familia, al

tipo de trabajo a que se dedica y al interés con que lo desempefia (7b).

De mucho menor trascendencia es la conducta penitenciaria, ya que

es bien conocida la ‘“mascara de la buena conducta” con que se

cubren muchos recidivistas (9).

RESULTADOS DEL EXAMEN

ACTUAL DE LA PERSONALIDAD DEL DELINCUENTE

Antes de referirnos a la importancia de los rubros que se men-

cionaran a continuacion, debemos sefialar que la edad del delincuente

es un factor que agrava a favorece el prondstico, segin si corresponde

a la adolescencia o a la senescencia del examinado, respectivamente

(D), (M y (8), 1o que también hemos constatado en nuestras observa-

clones.

1. Examen morfologico: Ninguno de los trabajos presentados se

refiere a esta materia. Nosotros también carecemo de la experiencia

necesaria y suficiente como para abordar, por ejemplo, la posible

relacidon existente entre los diversos tipos morfoldgicos y el recidi-

vismo. En cambio, hemos observado que el nimero, el origen, la

naturaleza y la ubicacion de ciertas cicatrices tienen una manifiesta

relacidon con su prondéstico.

II. Examen fisio-patologico: Atn cuando tampoco encontramos

mencion alguna acerca de los resultados de este exdmen, no nos cabe

duda del valor prondstico que deben tener los trastornos endocrinos

o metabolicos, las secuelas funcionales de enfermedades anteriores o

los diversos grados de invalidez sensorial o motora que puedan

afectar al delincuente, en atencion a que influyen sobre su conducta y

alteran o limitan, en mayor o menor grado, sus relaciones con el

grupo social, creando asi optimas condiciones para el desarrollo de

muchas formas de la patologia social.

III. Exdmen psicologico y neuro-psiquidtrico: Los diferentes grados

de inteligencia, desde el mas inferior hasta el mas superior, son

diversamente interpretados por los distintos autores, en cuanto a sus

relaciones pronoésticas se refieren (6), (7a), (7b), y (8). Nosotros esti-

141

mamos que la capacidad intelectual no debe ser considerada aislada-

mente, sino que en conjunto con otros elementos de juicio, tales como

el tipo de delito, el medio propio del delincuente, etc.

Gibbens (7d) analiza detenidamente el problema de la psicopatia.

Segun sus investigaciones, la psicopatia, por si misma, no tiene nece-

sariamente un mal prondstico, éste se agrava cuando la psicopatia va

unida a la epilepsia y mucho mas atn si estd combinada con trauma-

tismos encéfalo-craneanos. El electro-encéfalograma normal o

alterado no afectarian mayormente al prondstico, excepto cuando

las alteraciones aparecieran después de los 25 afios de edad. En un

trabajo que realizamos en Chile, en 1950, obtuvimos el 349, de

electro-encéfalogramas alterados en 100 homicidas, que no fueron

previamente seleccionados desde ninglin punto de vista. Esta ex-

periencia nos hace discrepar de las conclusiones de Gibbens. Atln

cuando carecemos todavia de las observaciones post-penitenciarias

de estos 100 homicidas, le atribuimos un valor prondstico a un

electro-encéfalograma alterado.

Ninguno de los trabajos presentados menciona las relaciones pro-

nosticas que seguramente deben tener las enfermedades infecciosas

del sistema nervioso central (encefalitis epidémica, sifilis, etc.) y las

secuelas de otras afecciones (traumatismos encéfalo-craneanos, par-

kinsonismo, etc.).

Yan Bemmelen (10) no se pronuncia en forma definitiva sobre el

valor pronodstico de las psiconeurosis en la dinamica del recidivismo.

Mackwood (2) sostiene que, cuando existen posibilidades de tra-

tamiento, la psiconeurosi es de mejor prondstico que el caracter

neuroético y que el de ambos cuadros es mejor que el correspondiente

a la psicopatia y al recidivismo sin anormalidad mental, cuadros que,

por lo demas, son muy similares. Para la mayoria de los autores la

combinacion de rasgos y caracteres neurdticos y psicéticos agravaria

el prondstico (6), (7b), (7d), (9) y (10). Los sentimientos de inferiori-

dad o de oposicion y resentimiento social, asi como la exagerada

dependencia o las aspiraciones desmesuradas, también tendrian

importancia pronéstica (8). La hiperemotividad, la elevada suges-

tionabilidad, la inestabilidad afectiva, la apatia o frialdad emocional,

la perversidad, la agresividad, asi como la falta de conciencia moral

y social, son otros tantos elementos citados por los diversos autores

(1), (2), (5) y (6). Las tendencias paranoides, esquizoides, depresivas

y epileptoides y la conduct anoral poliforma, en que coexisten varios

de estos rasgos, se mencionan en otros trabajos (6) y (7f).

La complejidad y diversidad de los rasgos caracteroldgicos exa-

minados nos impiden adentrarnos en mayores detalles, los cuales se

podran encontra en los respectivos trabajos originales. S6lo quisiera-

142

mos referirnos a la importancia prondstica que tiene la mayor o

menor labilidad al alcohol y el alcoholismo patoldgico, hechos que

hemos podido constatar en las investigaciones llevadas a cabo en

nuestro Instituo de Criminologia.

TRATAMIENTO PENITENCIARIO Y CONDICIONES

AL EGRESO

I. Tratamiento penitenciario previo al egreso: Este rubro se refiere

a las posibilidades reales y efectivas de tratamiento durante la

reclusion, tanto en relacion con la diversificacion de las instituciones

penales mismas, como del material y del personal especializado que

trabaja dentro de estas instituciones. El prondstico sera mejor cuando

existen ambas posibilidades es decir, cuando existen establecimientos

especiales para los distintos tipos de delincuentes y dentro de ellos los

medios terapéuticos necesarios.

Cuando se reunen ambas condiciones, los psiconeurdticos, por

ejemplo, tienen mejores espectativas prondsticas que cuando ellas no

existen, dejando inalterada o aumentada la angustia de los conflictos

no resueltos (2). Donde existen facilidades para el establecimiento de

reflejos condicionados, el prondstico de los distimicos (depresivos,

angustiados, obsesivos, etc.) es mejor que el de los histéricos y

psicopatas extravertidos, ya que, en igualdad de condiciones, los

primeros son mas accesibles que los segundos, que son mas resistentes

a esa terapia y sus resultados son mas efimeros (7c).

Lo mismo sucede con las posibilidades existentes para el apren-

dizaje de conocimientos generales o profesionales o cuando ello no

es posible por la falta de aptitudes para adquirir tales conocimientos

(1) y (5); cuando la asistencia social, moral y recreativa han per-

mitido o facilitado una mejor estabilizacién socio-afectiva, personal

y familiar (1); cuando la atencién médico-dental coloca al penado en

mejores condiciones fisicas que a su ingreso; etc.

Tratamiento penitenciario después del egreso: El pronéstico tam-

bién dependera de las mayores o menores posibilidades de continuar

los mismos tratamientos iniciados durante la reclusion, cuando el

delincuente se encuentre en ‘“‘probation”, liberdad condicional o

incondicional (1).

II. Condiciones al egreso: Las personales se relacionan con la

edad del penado al abandonar el establecimiento (1), (7f) y (10),

siendo al parecer de mejor prondstico cuando el egreso es posterior

Y no anterior a los 36 aiios (9); con los resultados mas o menos

favorables que pudieron haberse obtenido con las diversas medidas

terapéuticas mencionadas anteriormente; con sus sinceros y efectivos

143

deseos de trabajar (6); con las ideas realistas o fantasticas que el

penado tenga respecto a su porvenir inmediato; especialmente el

ocupacional; las condiciones econémicas que ha sido capaz de crear

durante su reclusion; como lo hemos visto en nuestra experiencia; etc.

Las sociales estan en estrecha concordancia con sus posibilidades

de regresar al hogar paterno (7a) o propio; y las aceptables prespec-

tivas de una adecuada estabilidad familiar, social y residencial (1).

Estos son factores pronosticos favorables. La falta de hogar (1), la

residencia inapropriada (5) y las malas condiciones socio-familiares

(9), son factores negativos. La naturaleza del trabajo que empren-

dera (1) o la falta del mismo, por sus condiciones de reo liberto u

otro motivo (5), son también factores negativos, lo mismo que la

estigmatizacion social o la persecucion policial del liberto (10.)

*

%k

%*

El hombre, en su eterno afan de simplificar los problemas, trata

de formular definiciones y clasificaciones, mas o menos precisas, para

ordenar su pensamiento y orientar su accion. Cada vez mas se busca

la aplicacion de formulas y ecuaciones matematicas en la compren-

sion de la dindmica de la conducta humana. Ellas nos permitent dar

a nuestras investigaciones ese aspecto estrictamente cientifico que

tanto anhelamos. Desgraciadamente, la realidad nos ensefia que no

basta sélo la ciencia para comprender muchos matices de la conducta

investigada; siempre nos sera indispensable un aporte subjetivo, con

mayor o menor base intuitiva, para la interpretacion de muchos

mecanismos conductuales y su valoracidn prondstica. La clinica es

perfectamente consciente de sus limitaciones, pero las prefiere a la

utilizacion de elementos rigidos, mecanicos, matematicos, los cuales,

si bién nos permiten ubicar al sujeto dentro de un panorama general,

no hacen justicia a sus peculiares caracteristicas. Las ‘“‘tablas de

prediccion” constituyen un buen ejemplo de lo expresado. Ellas

pueden ser utilizadas por el clinico como un elemento de juicio, mas

nunca como la unica herramienta de trabajo a su disposicion. Este,

para su labor diaria frente al enigma de la personalidad del delin-

cuente, no puede prescindir de su propio criterio clinico, formado a

base un serio conocimiento tedrico de las materias de su especialidad,

amalgamado con su larga experiencia personal.

Por el numero y la naturaleza de los factores citados en el esquema

de sistematizacion previamente esbozado y por la disparidad de

criterio con que los diversos autores se refieren a los mismos, es

facil comprender que el prondstico del recidivismo dista mucho de

ser una tarea sencilla o que permita alcanzar conclusiones seguras e

144

infalibles. Todos sabemos que en el arte de la clinica, el prondstico es

la faceta mas dificil.

Por otra parte, siempre debemos tener presente que una de las

dificultades mayores para establecer un prondstico clinico, radica en

la necesidad de conjugar, tanto como sea posible, las variaciones de

dos elementos que se encuentran en perpetua evolucion y modifica-

cion: el Individuo y el Medio. Aquel, con su experiencia personal,

singular y inica, que no tiene una total equivalencia con la de ningin

otro sujeto y éste, con sus caracteristicas de perenne fluctuacion, que

afectan tan diversamente a cada individuo. Por lo mismo, es impres-

cindible tener presente que toda sistematizacion de factores pronds-

ticos, sera fatalmente incompleta, variable y transitoria, pués tendra

que irse modificando continuamente, de acuerdo con el lugar, la

época, el grupo de delincuentes en estudio, las técnicas de examen y

de investigacion utilizadas por cada equipo de trabajo, las posibili-

dades terapéuticas disponibles, etc.

La elaboraciéon de un prondstico clinico, como con tanta razdn

sostiene Overbeek (5), esta basada en gran parte en juicios diagnods-

ticos que fluyen del examen individual del delincuente. Pero esto no

impide, en modo alguno, el aprovechiamento de antecendentes esta-

disticos elementales — que se desprenden de la experiencia diaria —

Y aun de otros mas elaborados.

ay factores que poseen una significacion propia, intrinseca, de

caracter clinico, estadistico o mixto. Pero en la labor diaria, frente

al caso individual, ellos carecen de un valor predeterminado, pués

siempre sera necesario valorarlos en intima relacion e interdepen-

dencia con todos los demas que sean pertinentes. Es efectivo que,

mediante un trabajo cualitativo y cuantitativo previo, cada factor,

aisladamente considerado, puede transformarse en un elemento util

para la construccion de una “tabla de prediccion”. Cuando asi se

procede, cada factor o “predictor”’, adquiere un valor rigido dentro

de una ecuacion matemadtica configurada con otros “predictores”

obtenidos de la misma manera. El conjunto de estos elementos con-

stituye la “tabla de prediccion”, es decir, el cartabdn fijo con que se

determina el pronostico del sujeto. No sucede lo mismo cuando se

usa el criterio clinico, en cuyo caso es imposible olvidar la interde-

pendencia ya aludida.

Como ya se dijo, el prondstico se basa en el diagndstico. Este se

establece generalmente por comparaciéon de un caso con otros

similares ya conocidos, que constituyen configuraciones mas o

menos tipicas, de reconocimiento y valoracion relativamente facil.

Pero como “no hay enfermedades, sino enfermos”, en la clinica la

mayoria de los casos no cuadran exactamente dentro de estas con-

145

CC-K

figuraciones; de esto deriva la dificultad para formular el diagndstico

y, consecutivamente, el prondstico resulta una tarea bastante mas

compleja. En otras palabras, las constelaciones extremas, como por

ejemplo la habitualidad y la ocasionalidad, pueden ser identificadas

con mayor facilidad y la prevision de su destino no ofrece mayores

obstaculos. Es en la zone intermedia, donde quedamos entregados a

la estimacion personal de las variaciones de los pequefios detalles

que, no por su aparente insignificancia, dejan de tener un valor

clinico, diagndstico y prondstico, apreciable.

Algo similar sucede con las tablas de prediccion: bastante cer-

teras en los casos extremos, resultan inseguras en los casos interme-

dios (11).

Por todo lo expuesto y basados, ademas, en nuestra experiencia de

20 afios en la direccion del Instituto de Criminologia de Chile, nos

permitimos insistir en la imprescindible necesidad del trabajo en

equipo, para poder afrontar, con mayores probabilidades de éxito,

la complejidad de esta tarea.

*

%*

%x

Concebida asi la determinacion del prondstico, valdria la pena

referirse a aquellos aspectos que se relacionan con la oportunidad en

que debe ser formulado; con su importancia para la decision de la

terapéutica que sea mas conveniente aplicar; y su repercusion sobre

el volimen general de la reincidencia.

Pareceria indudable que el prondstico debiera ser establecido

con la mayor precocidad posible en el curso de la carrera criminal

de un individuo, por cuanto ello permitiria utilizar oportunamente las

diversas medidas terapéuticas aconsejables y disponibles.

Lo mismo podriamos sostener respecto del momento en que debe

procederse al examen de la personalidad del delincuente. En los

paises latino-americanos este examen se realiza, por lo general, muy

tardiamente y, con frecuencia, después de un lapso mas o menos

largo, transcurrido desde la dictacion de la sentencia condenatoria.

En estas condiciones, el valor del examen y sus consecuencias pro-

nosticas disminuyen progresivamente, ya que el tiempo aprovechable

para la aplicacion de los medios terapéuticos se restringe propor-

cionalmente (2). Creemos firmemente que el examen de la personali-

dad del delincuente debiera iniciarse ya durante la substanciacion del

proceso judicial porque, en esta forma, el prondstico que de ese

examen se desprende, podra también ser aprovechado por el magis-

trado sentenciador, al permitirle elegir, con mayor conocimiento de

causa, la mas adecuada entre las medidas pues a su disposicion por

la ley.

146

De acuerdo con Overbeek (5), podriamos atin formular la sigui-

ente pregunta: qué significa “éxito”> en un prondstico favorable?

La aparente falta de comision de nuevos delitos seguramente no

basta. Todos conocemos el alto porcentaje de delitos que, por diver-

sos motivos, quedan impunes. También debe tomarse en cuenta que

la criminalidad no es la tinica expresion de la inadaptacion social, la

que puede revelarse a través de varias otras manifestaciones, tales

como las toxicomanias, la prostitucion, etc. Por eso, aunque parezca

redundante, conviene insistir en que un prondstico favorable y acer-

tado de recidivismo, sera solo aquel que considere la real y completa

reintegracion del individuo al grupo social.

Digamos, por ultimo, que el prondstico, atin el mejor elaborado,

no puede tener influencia alguna sobre el volumen generalmente

constate de la reincidencia, pués ésta, al fin y al cabo, es la resultante

de una serie de factores individuales y sociales que escapan al con-

trol del crimindlogo.

147

BIBLIOGRAFIA

(TRABAJOS PRESENTADOS A ESTA SECCION)

CANNAT, PIERRE: “La Lutte contre le Récidivisme par la

Fixation des Multi-Délinquants.”

MAckwoob, JoHN C.: “A Clinical Contribution to the Treat-

ment of Recidivism.”

MoNAcHEsI, ELio D.: “The Prognosis of Recidivism. American

Studies.”

OdLIN, LrLoyDp E.: “The Parole Prediction. Problems in the

United States.”

OVERBEEK, W. H.: “Quelques remarques sur la prognostique du

récidivisme.”

PINATEL, JEAN: “Le Pronostic du Récidivisme.”

~N N

ScotT, PETER: ‘“ An account of the work completed in Britain

during the last five years on the subject of the prognosis of

recidivism.”

(@)

MANNHEIM, J. H. and WILKINS, L. T.: “Prediction Methods

in relation to Borstal Training.”

(b)

RosE, A. G.: “Five Hundred Borstal Boys.”

(c)

FRANKS, CYRIL M.: “The Conditioned Reflex and its

relationship to Mental Abnormality.”

(d)

GiBBENS, T. C. N.: Unpublished Studies.

(e)

OGDEN, D. A.: “A Borstal Typological Survey’ (Brit.

Journ. Deling.).

(f)

Lewis, H.: “Deprived Children.”

(&)

BENSON, GEORGE: ‘“Classification, Allocation and Predic-

tion Tables.” (Brit. Journ. Deling.).

TAYLOR, R. S.: “Psychological Aspects of Recidivism.”

VALDES CASTILLO, ESTEBAN Y VALDES, EDUARDO: ““‘Prognosis de

la reincidencia criminal.”

10

VAN BEMMELEN, J. M.: “Recidivism and the Constancy of

Crime.”

11

WILKINS, L. T.: “Prediction in Criminology in England.”

*

*

%

Con posterioridad a la terminacion de nuestro trabajo, recibimos el siguiente:

Frey, ERwIN: “Entstehung, Ursachen und Prognose der Riickfallskriminali-

tat”,

por cuyo motivo no pudo ser incorporado en este Relato General.

148

SECTION 1V

PROGNOSIS OF RECIDIVISM

by Sheldon Glueck

Eleven individual papers from six different countries were contri-

buted to this Reporter on the topic of Prognosis of Recidivism. Some

discuss researches carried on by the contributors themselves, others

bring together a variety of studies by numerous workers in certain

countries. Your Reporter originally planned to summarise each of

these contributions before considering the topic of Prognosis in its

basic ramifications; but it became apparent that even brief digests

would take up too much space in this report. In general, it may be

said that the American and English contributions are essentially

concerned with formal statistical methods of prediction and with

testing the efficiency of prediction tables through their systematic use

On numerous and varied cases. The Continental contributions are,

on the whole, more impressionistic in their ideas as to which factors

supposedly portend a future of recidivism in the individual case and

which suggest a favourable prognosis. The Reporter commends the

various contributions to all who are interested in the progress of

criminology and penology, and must regretfully limit himself to mak-

ing reference to only those ideas in the individual papers that

especially lend themselves to inclusion in this report. He must beg the

indulgence of the learned contributors if, in their opinion, he has

omitted reference to valuable materials; for it has been no easy task

to choose from such an embarrassment of riches. The Reporter must

also ask the contributors to be considerate, as he is certain they will

be, if, in the opinion of some, he has over-emphasised the data from

some of the papers. At all events, he trusts he will not be chided for

chauvinism because it turns out that he has adverted most frequently

and extensively to contributions by American workers. It happens to

be an accident of history that the most extensive, varied and con-

tinuous preoccupation with methods of predicting recidivism has

occurred in the United States. It is a pleasure to note, however, that

other countries have begun to recognise the great importance of

predictive instrumentalities to the prognosis, understanding and pre-

vention of crime and

to the improvement of the various stages in the

administration of cri

minal justice.

149

In alphabetical order, the individual reports were submitted by the

following contributors:

l

Dr. Eleanor T. GLUECK, Research Associate, Harvard Law

School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

2

Dr. Auguste LEY, Honorary Professor of Psychiatry at the

University of Brussels, Belgium.

Dr. Elio D. MoNAcHEsI, Professor of Sociology, University

of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., U.S.A.

Dr. Lloyd E. OHLIN, Director, Centre for Education and

Research in Corrections, University of Chicago, Chicago,

Illinois, U.S.A.

Mr. W. H. OVeERBEEK, Avocat-Général prés de la Cour

d’Appel & Amsterdam, Netherlands.

M. Jean PINATEL, Secretary-General, International Society of

Criminology, Paris, France.

Dr. Peter Scort, Psychiatrist, London Juvenile Court

Remand Home, London, England.

Mr. R. S. TAYLOR, Senior Psychologist, H.M. Prison,

Wandsworth, England.

Dr. Estaban VALDES-CASTILLO Y MOREIRA, Professor of

Legal Medicine of the Faculty of Medicine, University of

Havana, Cuba, who submitted a paper jointly with Dr.

Eduardo VALDES SANTO ToMAS, President of the Council for

the Direction of the Prison of Havana, Cuba, and Professor

of the National Penitentiary School.

10.

Professor J. M. Van BEMMELEN, Leiden, Netherlands.

11.

Mr. L. P. WILKINS, Statistician, London, England.

Since the organisers of the Congress did not pose specific ques-

tions to be answered under each of the five Sections into which the

general topic of Recidivism has been divided for the purposes of the

Congress, the Reporter has arrived inductively at the fundamental

issues involved in the prognosis of recidivism. The basic problems

appear to be the following:

The Nature and Extent of Recidivism.

“Prognosis” and ‘“‘Prediction”.

The Uses of Predictive Tables.

LN

Objections to the Use of Predictive Tables as Instruments of

Prognosis.

Improvement of Predictive Devices.

A W

Resolutions on prognosis of Recidivism to be presented to

the Congress.

150

Not all the papers have discussed each of these topics; and some

have emphasised one or more of them, while others have taken up

matters not directly related to these subjects.

1. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF RECIDIVISM

Although the definition, extent, and causes of recidivism are treated

as separate topics of the Congress, a brief discussion of these matters

is an indispensable background to the topic of prognosis.

A basic difficulty in considering the prognosis of recidivism is

presented by the problems of definition and relative unreliability of

statistics. Recidivism can mean repetition of crimes similar to those

previously committed or the commission of other, or less serious,

offences. It can mean repeated criminalism within a brief period of

time or within a relatively long “test period”. It can be judged on the

conduct of offenders while on complete liberty, or on their behaviour

during a specified period of supervised probation, or parole or “on

licence”. It can be measured on the record of officially noted re-

arrests, reconvictions, reimprisonments, or on actual, though par-

tially unreported, criminalism, determined through supplementary

investigations.

Recidivism may also pertain to partial as well as total antisocial

conduct. One of the points that has received too little attention, is

what may be called the quality of recidivism. An ex-prisoner may

again commit one or more crimes during a test period and yet show

aspects of improvement. In this connection, Taylor makes the

thought-provoking point that even among ultimate recidivists there

are many who were free from relapse into criminalism during periods

of time in which they held jobs with some regularity and achieved

some stability. Such periods of relative immunity from criminalistic

expression deserve to be intensively studied; not only because ex-

prisoners should be given the utmost help over the rough places in

order to stretch out such stages of law-abidingness, but also because

of the insight into the recidivistic process and into the internal and

external threats to behavioural stability which intensive study of such

crime-free episodes should yield. This is analogous to the problem of

mental patients re

black

leased from hospitals; the picture is not usually

Or white, but involves areas of grey. On the other hand, a non-

recidi

Vist may, as Overbeek points out, be one whom the prison

regim

€ has transformed into a broken man, no longer having the

€nergy to commit aggressive crime but possibly antisocial in other

ways.

151

Another aspect of the quality of recidivism is discussed by Wilkins,

speaking of the work of himself and Mannheim in England. He

reports that their criteria of “‘success’ include not only the absence

of further indictable offences but two others aimed at estimating

degrees of success and failure. The various follow-up studies made by

the Gluecks also provide for a middle category of ‘““‘partial failure’ in

respect to recidivism, to economic responsibility, to family relation-

ships, to industry, and to use of leisure.?

There is also the problem of the fluctuation in the incidence of

recidivism according to the nature of the crime, a point emphasised

by Van Bemmelen and Pinatel. There is, further, the phenomenon

of the relationship of ageing and maturation to fluctuations in

the rates of recidivism, analysed in the follow-up studies of the

Gluecks.?2

Apart from these problems of the definition of the concept of

recidivism, a basic difficulty in discussing recidivism is that of asses-

sing its actual extent. As Van Bemmelen emphasises, official statis-

tics reporting on the repetition of crimes by those previously criminal-

istic are inadequate ; they are at best incomplete. In the Reporter’s

experience, official reports by courts, institutions, parole boards and

various national and international agencies tend to claim higher

“success’ rates on the part of persons released on probation from

courts or on parole from penal institutions than those actually

achieved. Among the reasons for this are the inadequacy of criminai

identification records, the failure to make intensive “follow-up”

investigations to determine the true extent of recidivism, the unwar-

ranted assumption that if an ex-prisoner has not been returned to the

particular court or prison from which he was released he has neces-

sarily reformed, the confining of the test of recidivism to too brief

periods,® and the natural tendency of official tables to be preju-

diced in ravour of their own correctional programmes.

Wherever possible, therefore, check-ups on the extent of recidi-

vism should be made by neutral investigators interested only in ob-

1 See Glueck, S. and E. T., 500 Criminal Careers, 1930, New York, Alfred A.

Knopf, pp. 188, 200, 205, 195-96, 209-10.

2 See Glueck, S. and E. T., After-Conduct of Discharged Offenders, London,

Macmillan and Co., 1945, and follow-up studies therein discussed, and presented

in note 2 (p. 153) hereof.

3 Scott reports that Mannheim and Wilkins found little difference between

assessments made on a one-year follow-up and those made on a three-year

one. If this can be established on other samples, it would of course reduce the

time and expense needed for follow-up studies. Until further evidence is adduced,

the Reporter remains sceptical on this point.

152

jective scientific research rather than in propagandising the supposed

efficiency of some peno-correctional device or institution. Such

studies will probably reveal less optimistic rates of successful treat-

ment of offenders, and higher proportions of recidivism, than those

found in official reports. For example, in a follow-up study of 500

young-adult offenders released from the Concord Reformatory in

Massachusetts, U.S.A., made by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, it

was conclusively established that four-fifths of the ex-prisoners com-

mitted new crimes (largely felonies) during a five-year post-parole

test period.! To be sure, subsequent follow-up studies of this group

over two more five-year periods showed a gradual diminution in

recidivism; there was, nevertheless, a continance in criminalism on

the part of substantial proportions of these offenders. Other inten-

sive follow-up investigations by these authors, involving juvenile

delinquents and female offenders, also showed high recidivism

rates. 2

However, even apart from intensive follow-up studies by neutral

investigators, the official statistics of recidivism, certainly in the

United States and probably also in other countries, show a con-

siderable history of repeated criminalism and imprisonment on the

part of those in penal institutions. Van Bemmelen reports that the

proportion of recidivists in Holland, although changing during and

after wars as do first convictions, constantly fluctuates around 40 per

cent of convicted offenders; and that the proportions tend not to be

too dissimilar in Germany and Scotland, and perhaps also in Eng-

land. A fair estimate of the official recidivism rate in the United States

would probably amount to around 60 per cent of the prisoners in

penal institutions for felons and probably an even higher proportion

of those serving sentences for petty offences.? The statistics of recidi-

vism of those released on probation are not as high; but even if one

were to accept, without independent check-up, the estimate of success

of probationers made by probation officials, the proportion of reci-

divism would be not inconsiderable. Furthermore, as Van Bemmelen

points out, the probability of recidivism is greater than the proba-

1500 Criminal Careers, op. cit.

* Glueck, S. and E. T., Later Criminal Careers, 1937, New York, The Common-

wealth Fund; Criminal Careers in Retrospect, 1943, New York, The Common-

wealth Fund; see also, Glueck, S. and E. T., One Thousand Juvenile Delinquents,

1934, Cambridge, Harvard University Press; Juvenile Delinquents Grown Up,

1940, New York, The Commonwealth Fund; and Five Hundred Delinquent

Women, 1934, New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

3 Glueck, S., Probation and Criminal Justice, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Uni-

versity Press, 1945, pp. 207-8.

153

bility of original criminalism and the chances of recidivism evidently

increase after each conviction.

This, of course, raises the crucial question of the reasons for the

relative inefficiency of existing punitive and correctional techniques in

preventing the repetition of crime.

Recent researches have established that one basic reason is the

fact that society has too long ignored the evidence that the tendency

to delinquency is deep-rooted, beginning to manifest itself very early

in life. In Unravelling Juvenile Delinquency, a research comparing 500

persistent delinquents with 500 proved non-delinquents from the

under-privileged areas of Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A., Sheldon

and Eleanor Glueck discovered that some nine-tenths of the delin-

quents showed persistent antisocial behaviour while still under the

age of eleven, and 50 per cent while under age of eight. Since

children are usually not brought into juvenile courts until several

years later, a great deal of the antisocial tendency has already been

fixed in the character structure of delinquents before official action is

taken. This is one explanation for the frequency with which adult

prisoners are found to have been juvenile offenders.

A second reason for the poor results of the existing peno-correc-

tional system is the fact that it is still too largely animated by the dis-

credited assumption that the imposition of painful punishment will in

itself, or very largely, “reform” criminals, despite the strong evidence

that the motivating and stimulating forces of criminalism are

numerous and complex and that the target of correctional effort

cannot therefore be limited to the instinct of fear. Legislators,

judges and administrators of penal justice still too largely fail

to take to heart the admonition of the wise and kindly Bishop in

Les Misérables, not to condemn in haste but to take circumstances

into account and to ‘“‘examine the road over which the fault has

passed”’.

A third reason for the excessive incidence of recidivism is the fact

that post-institutional conditions—whether those provided by official

action or by the home and environmental situations to which ex-

prisoners usually return—are not very favourable to the rehabilita-

tion of offenders.

These preliminary observations emphasise the central significance

of the early and efficient prognosis of both recidivism and original

delinquency. All who have to do with the problems of crime—judges,

clinical psychiatrists, administrators of correctional institutions, pro-

bation and parole officials, researchers—might improve their insight

and practices considerably if they had at their disposal instruments

for reliable judgments regarding the probability of delinquency and

154

recidivism of persons possessing various characteristics and sur-

rounded by differing circumstances.

2. “PROGNOSIS> AND “‘PREDICTION”’

The Continental and Cuban contributors to our topic tend to

speak, as does the formulation by the Congress itself, of ““prognosis”’

rather than prediction. Is there any substantial difference between

these concepts?

Prognosis is usually associated with the work of the clinician, who

assesses the future status of the individual case he has examined.

Prediction has come to denote the use, in forecasting behaviour of

individual offenders, of a table or chart in which the past recidivism

or non-recidivism of a large sample of offenders has been systemati-

cally correlated with the presence of a number of traits in the make-

up and background of those who have behaved satisfactorily as

compared to those who have not. This use of tabulated past ex-

perience to forecast future behaviour is based on the assumption,

borne out in certain validations of existing prediction tables, that the

association, en masse, between the various sub-classes of the group

of predictive factors and recidivism or non-recidivism shown in the

table to characterise past experience will be found to exist in other

samples of cases in future experience.

Some of the contributors, such as Ley, Overbeek, Pinatel, Valdes-

Castillo y Moreira and Valdés Santo Tomas, emphasise clinical prog-

nosis; others, such as Mrs. Glueck, Monachesi, Ohlin and Wilkins,

confine their papers to statistical prediction tables.

The two concepts—prognosis and prediction—are fundamentally

not different. Both require a systematic check-up to see whether,

in a substantial number of instances, the behaviour that has been

forecast had in fact turned out to be related to the factors which the

prognosticator has regarded as relevant to such behaviour. In con-

nection with a number of the contributions emphasising the clinical

prognostic approach, it seems to have been inferred, not proved by

systematic, intensive follow-up in large numbers of cases over a

sufficient period of time, that the various criminogenic processes and

factors alleged to indicate a “favourable” or “unfavourable” prog-

nosis, have in fact been reflected in related differences of behaviour.

For example, Pinatel points out that the clinical prognosis of recidi-

vism must be based not only on the pre-criminal situation (such as

Kinberg’s conception of the offender’s ‘“search for an occasion’ for

theft), but also on *“the inner life of the subject”, reflected in subtle

psychological processes, such as the mechanisms of compensation,

155

imitation, suggestibility, and habit and group attitudes. He makes

judgments as to favourable or unfavourable prognoses in various

situations involving such mental mechanisms. His excellent analysis

of the psychologic implications cannot, however, detract from the

fact that the true prognostic value of such undoubtedly important

mental mechanisms can be arrived at only through the systematic

check-up on large samples of cases of their presence or absence as

related to recidivism or non-recidivism. In the statistical prediction

table studies, there is not only a systematic intercorrelation between

varieties of factors and variations in behaviour but, in a few in-

stances, a ‘‘validation” of the tables through their application to

different samples of cases than those on which they were originally

constructed, to see whether they in fact predict the behaviour in sub-

stantial percentages of new cases.

The concepts of prognosis and prediction are also not fundamen-

tally distinguishable in respect to having to judge the individual case

in the light of past experience with numerous other cases. Good

clinical prognosis is dependent on the expert having gone through an

unconscious or conscious statistical process; for in making an esti-

mate of the future behaviour of the single person before him, the

clinician must take into account not only the data and symptoms

which that case presents, but similar data and similar symptoms he

has previously observed in many other cases. Thus, what is frequently

called a *‘clinical hunch” in the single case is but the precipitate of

long experience with many cases, brought to bear on the single case

in point. The only difference between this and statistical prediction is

that the latter involves objectified and systematically organised

experience, put into the form of an orderly table which shows the

probabilities of success or failure, non-recidivism or recidivism, on

the part of persons possessing, in varied degrees, combinations of

certain traits of personality, character and socio-cultural factors. This

would suggest that sound clinical prognosis in individual cases is

ultimately dependent for its efficiency on the statistical forecasting of

probabilities en masse.

It may be urged that by the statistical methods it is never possible

to say definitely whether any particular individual under considera-

tion will or will not recidivate. This is true; but it is also true that

without the aid of statistical experience tables involving numerous

cases the clinician is even less likely to be able to prognosticate

accurately in any individual instance.

156

3. THE USES OF PREDICTIVE TABLES

Before discussing the various uses of prediction tables, a word

about their construction.

Two basic methods have been developed in the United States—

that of Ernest W. Burgess! and that of Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck.?2

Monachesi, Ohlin and Mrs. Glueck discuss these methods in detail in

their reports. Here it need only be emphasised that while the Burgess

method gives equal weight to all factors found to be differentially

related to recidivism or non-recidivism during a one-year parole

period, the Glueck method, after first analysing the relationship of

numerous factors in the makeup and background of ex-prisoners to

their recidivism or non-recidivism during substantial test-periods (at

least five years for behaviour following parole), employs in the pre-

diction table only those few factors (usually five or six) which have

been found to bear highest relationship to variations in behaviour.

These few factors are combined into a “weighted score” based on

their association, in terms of percentages, with recidivism or non-

recidivism during the type of peno-correctional treatment for which

any particular table has been constructed. In the Burgess technique,

the individual case is scored by giving it one point for each pre-

parole factor which was found to have a parole-violation percentage

lower than the average or over-all violation rate for all offenders.

In the Glueck method each case is scored on the basis of the actual

! Burgess, E. W., “Factors determining Success or Failure on Parole” in The

Workings of the Indeterminate-Sentence Law and the Parole S ystem in Illinois, by

Bruce, Harno, Burgess, and Landesco, Illinois State Board of Parole, Springfield,

1928, Chap. XXX.

* Glueck, S. and E. T., 500 Criminal Careers, New York, Alfred A. Knopf,

1930, involving a S-year post-sentence follow-up period;: Later Criminal

Careers, The Commonwealth Fund, New York, 1937, involving a 10-year

follow-up period; Criminal Careers in Retrospect, New York, The Common-

wealth Fund, 1943, involving a 15-year follow-up of thesc same cases; One

Thousand Juvenile Delinquents, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1934,

involving a follow-up of delinquents during a 5-year period; Juvenile Delin-

quents Grown Up, The Commonwealth Fund, New York, 1940, covering these

same delinquents durin

g a 15-year follow-up; Five Hundred Delinquent Women,

New York, Alfred A.

Knopf, 1934, involving a 5-year follow-up period. See,

also, After-

Conduct of Discharged Offenders, Macmillan Company, London,

1945, re summary of the various findings of these studies of recidivism. In

Unravelling Juvenile Delinquency, The Commonwealth Fund, New York, 1950,

prediction tables are presented designed to forecast juvenile delinquency on the

part of children, these being based on the traits and factors found to differ-

entiate most markedly between a sample of 500 delinquents and 500 non-

delinquents.

157

violation rate of the particular sub-class of each predictive factor to

which the person belongs, his total score on the group of factors yield-

ing his chances of success or failure under each of the forms of treat-

ment and during the post-parole test period.

There have been various modifications of these basic methods, in

the United States and in England. Monachesi discusses a number of

these, including some that employ the attitudes of offenders as a pre-

dictive indicator, others that seek the key to prediction in standard

and readily administered tests such as the Minnesota Multiphasic

Personality Inventory, or in the opinions of fellow-prisoners. Scott

mentions that Frey, in Switzerland, has developed a complex method

which “combines an integrated picture of the development of the

whole personality, with a modified points system”. American and

English modifications of the two basic approaches of Burgess and the

Gluecks largely concern refinement of mathematical techniques (as in

the work of Ohlin and others in America and Mannheim and Wilkins

in England). Whichever method is used, the underlying conception is

the same; namely, that organised and objectified experience with

numerous cases in the past, as related to certain characteristics of

those cases, can be useful in forecasting the conduct of new cases in

the future.

Predictive instruments are of value (a) not only in forecasting

recidivism of those already criminalistic but also (b) in determining

which children will probably become delinquent and (c) in suggestiug

fruitful lines of research into the causes of criminalism.

(a) The most obvious use of prediction tables is in the adminis-

tration of criminal justice. The predictive table technique can be em-

ployed at various stages—sentencing, classification within an institu-

tion, and parole. The Gluecks have developed tables to be used not

only in forecasting behaviour during post-parole periods but also in

making sentencing decisions, which distinguish between the charac-

teristics and forecast the behaviour of convicts who, at various ages,

will do well or poorly on ordinary probation, probation with sus-

pended sentence, in a correctional school, in a reformatory, in a jail

or house of correction, and on parole. They have also constructed a

table dealing with whether a former prisoner will do satisfactorily or

poorly in the armed services. Mrs. Glueck discusses these develop-

ments and lists 48 prediction tables thus far built from the Glueck

researches. Monachesi reports on his studies which analysed the

factors predicting success or failure on probation and the varied

responses of delinquents to placement in foster-homes. His report

discusses many other prediction studies dealing with different stages

in the treatment of the offender.

158

Thus far, however, there has been relatively little official adoption

of prediction methods in the practical administration of justice. In the

United States, the State of Illinois has accepted the use of experience

tables to aid the parole board in selecting prisoners for release on

parole, in helping parole supervision officers to focus attention on

doubtful cases, and in formulating general policy. Illinois maintains

an Office of Sociologist-Actuary in each of its three branches of the

penitentiary system, who is charged with preparing routine prediction

reports on cases appearing before the parole board and with carrying

on research designed to improve prediction methods and increase

understanding of the careers of criminals.

At the International Penal and Penitentiary Congress at The Hague

in 1950, this Reporter emphasised that predictive devices might serve

as a useful aid to courts in imposing sentence. So far as is known,

however, no court as yet makes official use of prediction tables. Their

employment would serve to focus the attention of judges on the fac-

tors in the make-up and background of offenders that are most rele-

vant to the choice of sentence most appropriate in the individual case,

thereby adding to the education of judges and improving the senten-

cing process. Such tables, being based upon an analysis of results,

would induce judges to individualise in the light of objectified and

systematised experience, instead of arriving at decisions from a mere

reading of a pre-sentence report or dossier covering a great deal of

information, without knowledge which parts of it are especially rele-

vant to subsequent behaviour. As an illustration, the Reporter quotes

a passage from his paper presented at The Hague:

Suppose, for example, that a judge had before him separate

prognostic tables based on fines, on incarceration in a prison, on

imprisonment in a reformatory or Borstal institution, on com-

mitment to a special school for juvenile delinquents, on pro-

bation, or, even more discriminatively, on results obtained in the

past by different probation officers. And suppose that the judge,

upon consultation of this series of predictive tables, found that

prisoner X, according to past experience with other prisoners

who in certain pertinent respects resembled X, had nine out of

ten chances of continuing in crime if sent to prison, eight out of

ten if sent to a reformatory or Borstal, six out of ten if com-

mitted to the industrial school, five out of ten if placed on pro-

bation, and only two out of ten if placed on probation under the

oversight of Probation Officer Y. Clearly, the judge would have

very pertinent organised data in the light of which to indivi-

dualise; that is, to discriminate scientifically among several

159

alternatives, and choose the one most suited to the particular

offender in question.?

This does not, of course, mean that the judge should follow such

experience tables blindly—a point which is discussed later.

(b) It is, however, in the early selection of those children who will

probably become delinquent unless timely and effective preventive

action 1s interposed that the predictive table promises to make its

crowning contribution. Although the Congress topic under discus-

sion is the prognosis of recidivism, the prediction of future criminal

careers on the part of children not yet delinquent is relevant; because

recidivism is so often but a later, more or less chronic, stage of delin-

quency. Mrs. Glueck’s paper reports on several successful valida-

tions, on groups of children of varied ethnic, religious, and social

background, of the Social Prediction Table published in Unravelling

Juvenile Delinquency. That table 1s designed to discover which boys,

at the early age of six, when they enter the first grade in school and

are therefore faced with the first test of adaptability to a social code

imposed by others than their own parents, are likely to become delin-

quents and which are not. The table in question employs five factors:

discipline of boy by father (whether overstrict or erratic, or lax, or

firm but kindly), supervision of boy by mother (whether unsuitable,

fair, or suitable), affection of father for boy (whether indifferent, or

hostile, or warm), affection of mother for boy (similarly sub-classified),

and cohesiveness of family (subclassified into unintegrated, some ele-

ments of cohesion, cohesive). For more than two years this table has

been applied to all first-grade boys entering two public schools in an

underprivileged, crowded area of New York City. In one school, the

boys whom the table selects as potential delinquents are given the

benefit of study and treatment at a clinic; in the other school no

treatment is furnished. The cases are being followed up until the age

of eleven to determine both the accuracy of the predictions and the

efficacy of therapeutic intervention at an early age. While this re-

search will go on for several years, there is already persuasive indica-

tion that the table successfully distinguishes future delinquents from

future non-delinquents in the finding that while, thus far, 72 per cent

of the children detected as potential delinquents are already showing

behavioural difficulties in the classroom, less than 17 per cent of those

not indicated to be potential delinquents are causing trouble in

school. If, as seems likely, this test of the screening device for poten-

1 Glueck, S., “Pre-Sentence Examination of Offenders to Aid in Choosing a

Method of Treatment”, J. of Crim. Law and Criminology, Vol. 41, No. 6 (March-

April), 1951, p. 729.

160

tial delinquents proves highly effective, it should be a powerful

weapon in a prophylactic and preventive approach to delinquency

and therefore to recidivism.

(c) In addition to the two areas already noted—the various stages

of criminal justice and the prediction of juvenile delinquency—pre-

dictive tables are also useful in yielding clues to fruitful avenues of

research.

One basic line of research might determine the reasons why cer-

tain factors have high predictive value. This involves going behind the

factors themselves to determine their linkage, at one end with more

subtle prognostic elements, and at the other with the different peno-

correctional practices and the variations in the domestic, vocational

and recreational situations to which the ex-prisoner returns.

An important research in this connection is suggested by the ques-

tion as to which types of traits are most predictive—those dealing

with personality traits, those concerned with traits of character, or the

factors expressive of the social conditions in or outside the home.

Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck have found that the three predictive

tables published in Unravelling Juvenile Delinquency have about equal

potency in forecasting potential delinquency, although one was de-

rived from psychiatric examination, the second from use of the

Rorschach (“inkblot™) Test, the third from social investigation. In

doubtful cases, the use of two or three of the tables would help in

determining whether, for example, traits shown by the Social Pre-

diction Table to be present are relatively deep-seated. However, since

the psychiatric and Rorschach approaches to prediction require

especial skill and the social factors can be readily obtained by social

workers, teachers and others, the Social Prediction Table is the most

practicable.

Another promising line of research is suggested by a comparison

of the factors found predictive of recidivism in the various reports

submitted. If definitions of terms and reliability of the data used as

predictors were sufficiently uniform, the Reporter might have

developed a table collating the various factors alleged to have the

highest prognostic potency in the different studies referred to in the

individual contributions; but this was unfortunately not possible. To

cite a few random examples, however, a poor work record and a

record of prior repeated convictions are among factors that several

contributors regard as unfavourable signs, while there appears to be a

difference of opinion respecting the predictive efficacy of such factors

as mental deficiency, psychopathic heredity (a fact hard to establish),

early age at first court appearance or conviction, and certain factors

relating to unwholesome family life.

161

CC—-L

If definitions and reliability of the information entering into the

tables were sufficiently uniform, it would be illuminative to determine

the reasons for variations in the factors found effective in forecasting

different forms of conduct within a single country or culture and as

between various countries. It would be especially interesting to look

into the extent to which the prediction tables or prognostic factors

found effective in one country would work efficiently in other coun-

tries and the reasons for such divergencies as might emerge. It would

bring to light the modifications that might have to be made in local

tables to meet special cultural circumstances. The extraction of those

factors found in many studies, here and abroad, to be universally pre-

dictive of recidivism would be suggestive of the traits which might be

regarded as fundamentally causal of repeated criminalism, irrespec-

tive of variations in ethnic and cultural differences and of peno-

correctional practices.

But apart from studies comparing and collating predictive factors

from various researches, emphasis on the linkage between variation

in factors and differences in behaviour, which is the crux of the pre-

dictive instrument, tends naturally to improve research into the

causes of criminalism. Lord Byron somewhere says that ‘““the best of

prophets of the future is the past”. This is only partially true about

prognosis of criminal conduct; for recidivism is related not only to

the traits and socio-cultural backgrounds of various classes of offen-

ders, and to the shortcomings of the penologic personnel and the cor-

rectional techniques—matters in the offenders’ past—but also to the

unfavourable family and other conditions to which offenders return

on release from prison—influences of the future. As Overbeek points

out, he who would prognosticate must know the intimate details of

all these aspects of the situation. Nevertheless, there is probably

major predictive potency in the characteristics of the offenders

themselves, as is suggested by a number of the contributors, including

Ley, Pinatel, Taylor, Valdes-Castillo y Moreira, Valdés Santo Tomas,

Van Bemmelen and Mrs. Glueck. These characteristics linked to

recidivism, whether largely innate or largely acquired, are also more

or less intimately related to the etiologic processes that were involved

in the original delinquency. That is why research into traits that have

prognostic power should lead to research into the causes of delin-

quency and criminalism.

For even those predictive factors having to do with the offender’s

past history do not necessarily explain the original misconduct. For

example, some predictive tables include the item of industrial in-

stability; but the fact that an offender’s employment history shows

him to be an unreliable and erratic workman is not a sufficiently

162

penetrating explanation of his criminalism. Why has he and others

like him been so unstable vocationally and how has this led to their

misconduct? If their industrial instability is largely attributable to

alcoholism, what made them chronic inebriates? If a basic cause of

their poor work record is laziness, what made them indolent? If a

basic cause is chronic fatigue, what are the causes of that? Not only

factors related to recidivism but those predicting original delinquency

do not necessarily throw enough light on the etiologic process. For

example, one such factor in the Glueck Social Prediction Table for

delinquency is family disunity. The lack of family cohesiveness during

the formative years of a boy’s life (together with four other factors of

pathologic family relations) markedly enhances the probability of his

becoming delinquent. But this factor,although of immediate value as a

predictor of future behaviour, is only a beginning clue to the etiologic

involvements. It is necessary to dig further into the various syn-

dromes of influence that make for a disorganised family life. How-

ever, the importance of prediction for research into causation is

illustrated by the fact that if one had not begun with such a clue

derived from prediction, the search for deeper causal involvements

would not be as well guided by a focus on the relevant factors. This

value of prediction technique as a sort of criminologic ‘“‘Geiger

counter” leading to the discovery of causes of delinquency and reci-

divism not visible on the surface has not as yet been sufficiently appre-

ciated.

In recent years some workers in the field of prediction have shied

away from the concept of ““cause”. Wilkins, for example, reports that

he and Mannheim are very critical of the idea of cause; they sub-

stitute “decision theory” for the concept of causality. This Reporter

is, of course, fully aware that statistical association does not neces-

sarily indicate causation. He must nevertheless insist that it is good

practical sense to conclude that where a group of factors preceding

the fact of recidivism, or delinquency, is found in excess among

persons who become criminals and is relatively absent in those who

remain law-abiding, there is a high probability of a functional rela-

tionship between those factors and the behaviour in question even

though one cannot as yet trace the specific and subtle links in the

chain of causation. In such a relationship it is reasonable to conclude

that one is dealing with some sort of causal connection between the

factors and the behaviour, rather than with “the long arm of coinci-

dence”; that, in other words, the recidivism or criminalism not

merely follows the presence of the factors in question, but follows

from it. Moreover, the causal sequence can be rationally tested by

f:xperiments designed to modify or eliminate the conditions that have

163

been found to precede delinquency in one sample of cases in order

to prove whether or not the subsequent result in the new sample

turns out in fact to be delinquency or non-delinquency.

In this sense of ‘“‘cause”, prediction studies can be of great value

in research. They focus attention on those factors which most

markedly differentiate recidivists from non-recidivists, and potential

delinquents from non-delinquents. By experimenting with therapeutic

and preventive attacks on such factors and noting the extent to which

factors most highly predictive of recidivism are also most crimino-

genic, there could result a more specific determination of etiologic

mechanisms than has thus far been discovered.

Another line of causal research derived from prediction analysis

is suggested by the probability that a large number of factors whose

differentiative nature is not as great as those which most markedly

distinguish recidivists from non-recidivists will add up to a totality

of influence as potent for prediction (and, indirectly, for crimino-

genesis) as is the smaller number of especially weighty factors. Predic-

tion techniques can thus lead to the tracing of a variety of etiologic

patterns or syndromes, each of which is just sufficient to tip the scales

of impulse versus inhibition in favour of recidivism or delinquency.

This is the concept of the plurality of causes, expressed in the analogy

that, just as the fact of a boy’s death, although always the same

terminal event, may nonetheless be the result of a variety of preceding

sequences of conditions, so the terminal event of delinquency or reci-

divism may have in its etiologic ancestry a variety of different

sequences leading to the single behavioural result of original or

chronic criminalism. This concept of plurality of criminogenic

etiology would seem to be a more reasonable hypothesis than the

persistent mirage of the single pot of gold at the end of the etiologic

rainbow expressed in the historic quest for a unitary cause or single

theory of causation.

4. OBJECTIONS TO THE USE OF PREDICTIVE TABLES AS PROGNOSTIC

INSTRUMENTS

It has been mentioned that there has been disappointingly little

adoption, officially, of the prediction table technique in peno-correc-

tional practice. Not only laymen, but judges, correctional adminis-

trators and even certain clinical psychiatrists, object to the use of

statistically based prognostic devices to forecast delinquency or reci-

divism 1n the individual case.

The objections, some of which are mentioned by Ohlin, others

by Overbeek, can be summarised under four headings:

164

(a) Underlying predictive techniques is the assumption of a deter-

ministic, if not fatalistic, sequence of cause and effect in human

affairs, this doing violence to the nobler conception of human action

as the result of the exercise of a ““free will’’. (b) Predictive tables fail to

take account of the fact of change in personal and social conditions,

since they are built on the assumption that the traits and background

factors will remain as they were when the tables were constructed.

(c) Human conduct is the outcome of the dynamic interplay of

numerous and complex influences of person and environment, but

prediction tables can at best employ only a small number of these

factors and relate them to conduct, not as a unitary dynamic syn-

drome but as separate items. (d) Since prediction tables deal with

individuals as statistical types, they cannot truly ‘“‘individualise”, for

by treating the problem en masse to start with, those who use the

tables perforce lose sight of the uniqueness of the individual case,

especially in respect to the more subtle and unmeasurable aspects of

the personality observed in the clinical situation. This, it is urged, can

result in grave injustices in individual instances.

(a) Regarding the first of these criticisms—the assumption behind

predictive tables of an absence of freedom of will in human affairs,

since it is impossible to measure the degree of “free will”’ which dis-

tinguishes recidivists from non-recidivists, this factor cannot practi-

cally be employed in a prediction table any more than it can be accur-

ately assessed in clinical prognosis. If other factors, which can be

fairly well assessed, do in fact bear a high relationship to subsequent

conduct, it is possible to use them in a prognostic instrument without

taking any position in respect to any particular theory of human be-

haviour. If it is demonstrated that the predictive factors do forecast

conduct, this is a tough fact of human experience which cannot be

conjured away by insisting that according to a certain school of

philosophy Man possesses absolute freedom of will.

(b) The more realistic criticism that prediction tables do not take

account of changes in the person and situation has some validity.

However, Ohlin, Wilkins and others have been developing methods

to modify prognostic instruments continuously in the light of chang-

ing conditions in order to render them more dynamic and efficient.

(c) Regardin

g the criticism that predictive methods cannot yield

ad

equate prognoses because they take account of only a small sample

of the numerous factors leading to repeated crime (or to original

delinquency) and do not analyse their dynamic interplay as a unitary

force, Ohlin describes recent advances in statistical methods of in-

creasing the prognostic precision of predictive tables, by deriving

“multiple correlation weights” based on the relationship of the pre-

165

dictive factors to each other and to recidivism, or by another method

of arriving at clinical syndromes statistically, through a “complete

subclassification of all predictive factors taken together”, resulting in

syndrome of factors which applies to all cases in the classification

and represents a closer approximation to the model of clinical proce-

dure than any other method proposed” (Ohlin)

However, such elaborate techniques for refining predictive instru-

ments are not indispensable to efficient predictive work. The test of

the prognostic power of a table is the pragmatic one. If it improves

substantially upon impressionistic ‘“hunches’ or guesswork, it is a

satisfactory device. Subtle and dynamic traits not included in the

predictive instrument but which the clinician regards as aids to indivi-

dualisation (such as subconscious motivations), can always be taken

into account by him after the basic differentiation of recidivists from

non-recidivists, or potential delinquents from non-delinquents, has

been accomplished by the mass-experience prediction table

individualisation” and the

(d) Regarding the related issue of

supposed advantages of the case-record or dossier approach to prog-

nosis over the mass statistical method of prediction, there is a great

deal of concern. For example, in respect to the quotation given above

from your Reporter’s paper to the 1950 International Penal and Peni-

tentiary Congress of The Hague, Overbeek seriously doubts whether

it is possible to assemble materials for prognostic tables to permit of a

801ent1ﬁc basis for sentencing in the individual case, or for assessing

the influence of any particular probation officer on the behaviour of

probationers. He argues that the task of the judge is different from

that of the doctor, that in following the indications of a prediction

table the judge risks the doing of injustice in individual cases, and

that the tables do not predict accurately in all cases.! The objection

that it is impossible to gather the necessary materials for the success-

ful use of prediction tables is answered by the evidence of numerous

researches, especially in the United States, that this has in fact been

done. The objection that it is impossible to assess the influence of a

supervising officer is answered by the fact that this, also, has in fact

been done. To cite one example, in the Gluecks’ 500 Criminal

Careers? it was found that although there was uniformity in the per-

centage of recidivism in both the parole and post-parole periods

among ex-inmates of a reformatory supervised by several parole

officers, the failure rate of the parolees under the care of Officer No. 4

was appreciably lower than that of the others. The objection that

1 Overbeek also raises a legal objection which is discussed in a note at the

end of this paper

2 Op. cit., pp. 265-6

166

predictive tables cannot forecast accurately in all cases is obviously

unreasonable. All that can be expected is that they improve upon

existing practices; and, as Mrs. Glueck’s report brings out, the valida-

tions of the Glueck table predicting delinquency and the table fore-

casting behaviour in the armed services, proved that the tables had a

substantially greater prognostic power than did the judgments of

clinicians. As to Overbeek’s general opposition to the use of predic-

tion tables in connection with sentencing, it need only be said that he

has overlooked the following passage from the report in question,

which immediately succeeds the part quoted above on which he bases

his criticisms:

By recommending the use of prognosis devices, the aim is not

to substitute statistical tables for judicial experience in the sen-

tencing of offenders. It is rather to supply the judge with an

instrument of prime importance in his work of individualising

justice. A judge should not follow these tables blindly. They are

designed to help him set the individual in the perspective of orga-

nised experience with hundreds of other offenders who in many

crucial respects resemble the offender before him for sentence.

As to some factors the offender remains a unique personality;

but the dimensions of the problems he presents can be much more

accurately assessed by the judge if he compares the crucial prog-

nostic traits with the total picture of hundreds of other offenders

than if he relies exclusively on his unorganised “experience”.!

Overbeek suggests that the use of prediction tables as an aid to

decision would be inhumane and unjust. He writes that he himself

“would be guided by hope, by humanity, by charity, if you will, but

not by science”. But these admirable qualities in the tempering of

Justice with mercy are not necessarily lost because a judge or a parole

board uses prediction tables to aid in arriving at the best disposition

of the case under consideration. It is not justice and humanity that

are redyced by the aid of prediction tables, but rather impressionism,

at best, and guess-work or prejudice, at worst.

The only way diagnosis itself, which, as Overbeek makes clear, is a

preliminary to prognosis, can be reliably made in the individual case

is by the clinician knowing, ahead of time, which of the links in the

supposed etiologic chain he finds present in the particular case now

before him have in the past been found significantly to differentiate

' Glueck, S., “Pre-Sentence Examination of Offenders to Aid in Choosing a

Method of Treatment™, J. of Crim. Law and Criminology, Vol. 41, No. 6, March-

April, 1951, pp. 717, 729.

167

delinquents from non-delinquents, or recidivists from non-recidivists,

in hundreds of previous cases analysed en masse. On the basis of such

systematically organised experience with many prior cases, the

clinician can exercise his judgment in respect to the instant case in

the light of the high probability of certain traits and factors being

causal in that particular case because past experience has shown them

to have been probably causal in numerous similar cases.

Certain clinicians, as well as judges and parole board members,

insist upon the fact that every individual is unique, and that intuitive

assessment of personality and behaviour can and ought therefore to

be replaced by statistical computations of mass experience. In reply

to this, the Reporter can only repeat here what he said at the 1950

Congress of the International Penal and Penitentiary Commission,

that ““it is a naive self-confidence that makes a judge, or criminologist,

or psychiatrist, or probation officer assume that he can detect the

minutest details of difference of personality, character, motivation,

socio-economic background and other subtle factors and forces that

distinguish one offender from another, and on top of that, determine

the exact nature and amount of correctional-rehabilitative treatment

suited to the individual case and to that case alone. Only God can do

that!”! As already emphasised, proponents of the use of predictive

instruments as aids to prognosis certainly do not advocate the substi-

tution of any blind, mechanical application of a statistical table for

the clinical assessment of the individual case.? The prediction table

does not replace the clinician. It merely aids him to objectify and

organise his experience more svstematically.

5. IMPROVEMENT OF PREDICTIVE DEVICES

Methods for enhancing the scientific soundness and practical utility

of predictive devices can be considered under the heads of (a) im-

provement of the raw materials entering into predictive tables and of

check-ups on the relationship of predictive factors to outcomes; (b)

improvement of statistical techniques; (c) validation of experience

tables.

(a) A basic reason for the great variation in traits found in

numerous studies to be associated with delinquency or recidivism, is

1 Glueck, S., op. cit., pp. 717, 723.

2 Thus, while the opponents of parole prediction methods feared that it would

lead to mechanical parole selection, it has turned out in the Illinois system that

“the net result of the use of the tables has been to challenge the application of

mechanical formulas at every point and to force more detailed examination of

the unique merits of the individual casc’. (Ohlin.)

168

the great divergence in' the reliability of the raw data that originally

went into the different researches. The variety—not to emphasise the

contradictions—in the factors deemed important for prognostication

by the Gluecks, Ley, Mannheim and Wilkins, and by the workers

whom Monachesi, Ohlin and Pinatel mention, is in large measure due

to this fundamental difference in the quality of the building blocks

that went into the predictive structures. All the neat tables and

sophisticated mathematical statistics in the world cannot transform

unverified raw data regarding temperament, character and socio-

cultural conditions into trustworthy information. This applies also

to the reliability of the check-up on recidivism. A number of the con-

tributors, notably Ohlin, Scott, Wilkins, and Mrs. Glueck, stress the

fundamental necessity of improvement of the methods of gathering,

measuring and verifying the raw materials of research in this field.

Ohlin points out that while Burgess relied on the accuracy of the

information as to both predictive factors and recidivism in the records

of the Illinois Parole Board, the Gluecks did not depend on official

records alone, but made intensive field investigations of their own,

thereby establishing greater confidence in the trustwoirthiness of the

predictive factors and in the actual extent of recidivism. As Wilkins

reports, he and Mannheim are much concerned with reducing the

taint of subjectivity in predictive data; and as Scott states, quoting

from their work, they commendably concede that because of the

questionable reliability of some of their raw materials, and the fact

that the information was not originally gathered for research purposes,

their study is more in the nature of a contribution to method than an

immediately usable instrument for administrative action.

(b) If they are to be reliable, researches involving predictive instru-

mentalities must satisfy certain minimal statistical requirements.

The first of these is the problem of the size and reliability of the

samples involved, and the need of control groups. For example,

although Ley uses a control group, his samples of recidivists and non-

recidivists are, as he concedes, far too small to serve as a basis for

reliable conclusions. The samples on which the Glueck Social Predic-

tion Table has been validated are not large, but they are varied and

cumulative in their proof of the potency of that predictive instrument.

As to the need of control groups, the French studies of mental defi-

ciency and character defects reviewed by M. Pinatel, the studies on

which Valdes-Castillo y Moreira and Valdés Santo Tomds base their

views, and some of the studies mentioned by Van Bemmelen, supply

no evidence that carefully matched samples of non-criminals have

been used as checks on the findings regarding criminals and recidi-

vists, although there i1s some comparison of delinquents with

169

recidivists. Such weaknesses do not wholly invalidate the findings,

which may still serve as the bases of fruitful hypotheses, but they raise

questions about their conclusiveness.

Another requirement of studies comparing recidivists with non-

recidivists is the employment of some statistical measure of signifi-

cance to determine whether differences in the incidence of traits are

trustworthy or are to be attributed to chance. Most of the American

studies, as well as those by Mannheim and Wilkins and that by

A. G. Rose summarised in Scott’s paper, have been careful to subject

variations in trait-incidence to the mathematical discipline of a test

of significance; there is no evidence in the studies reported on by

Pinatel, Ley and Valdes-Castillo y Moreira and Valdés Santo Tomas

of the use of such tests.

In the United States and England there has in recent years been

interest in researches using more sophisticated mathematical tech-

niques than those employed by Burgess and the Gluecks in their

pioneering studies. These are designed to attack fundamental

theoretical problems of prediction; and involve such matters, among

others, as determination of the relative accuracy of different syn-

dromes of factors as indices of the total set of forces affecting be-

haviour on parole; determination of how the various existing pre-

dictive tables differ in the degree of ‘“‘predictive efficiency”, that is to

say, the extent to which they improve predictions over choices simply

on the knowledge of an over-all actual rate of recidivism;! the prob-

blem, emphasised in the report by Wilkins, of enhancing the accuracy

of forecasting the behaviour of the ‘““unpredictable’ group, that is,

cases with average chances of success or failure; the problem stressed

by Ohlin, of maintaining the “predictive stability”” of experience

tables when they are applied to other samples of cases at successive

times; the problem, emphasised by Wilkins and Ohlin, of reducing

“overlap” between factors; the guiding of the original selection of

predictive factors for a table in accordance with one or another

pre-existing theory of criminal causation or of recidivism.

It is obviously impossible to detail all these developments in this

general statement on prognosis. The Reporter wishes to say a few

words about only two of them—the maintenance of the efficiency of

1 “Analysis of published results shows that the predictive efficiency of the

experience tables in follow-up samples varies from an efficiency of 25 per cent

to a loss of 41 per cent in efficiency over what could be achieved with a simple

prediction of success for all cases,” a ‘“notable exception to these modest results”

being the predictive efficiency of the Glueck Social Prediction Scale from Un-

ravelling Juvenile Delinquency which has been computed by Ohlin as 55 per cent

(Ohlin).

170

predictive tables by keeping them abreast of changing conditions, and

the problem of overlap of factors.

Ohlin and Wilkins report on the researches in the United States

and England designed to keep predictive instruments dynamic and

up-to-date. Concededly, conditions change, and so do people; and

actual experience with the tables and with the practice of correctional

facilities ought therefore to be re-examined periodically in order to

modify prognostic instruments to accord with changed conditions.

However, on the basis of experience with numerous follow-up

studies, this Reporter questions whether people and conditions

change as quickly and as fundamentally as the emphasis on ‘“con-

tinued validation in use” (Wilkins) would suggest.

As to the problem of ‘““overlap”, Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck,

in constructing their numerous prediction tables, have found that

some degree of overlap between factors is not too detrimental and,

indeed, might even be desirable, in that in the absence of information

on one predictive factor in a particular case the remaining ones will

yield essentially sound prognoses because of their partial inter-

relationship with the missing factor.

These comments on but two of the major issues that have in recent

years engaged the attention of designers of prediction tables deal

only partially with the more sophisticated statistical researches going

on in the United States and England. Such studies are ably discussed

in the papers of Monachesi, Ohlin, Scott and Wilkins. While they

would seem to suggest much greater interest in refinements of the

design of tables of predictability than in such basic “bread-and-

butter” problems as the improvement of the soundness of the raw

materials entering into predictive instruments, they indicate that this

entire field is on the way to achieving “scientific respectability”. In

the meantime, the view of this tendency towards ever greater mathe-

matical refinement, expressed in the paper by Mrs. Glueck, is shared

by this Reporter. Because of accumulating evidence of the successful

validations of our simply organised tables, one wonders whether the

excessive preoccupation with mathematical refinements has not

something in it of emphasis of form over substance. The Glueck

tables, for example, are based on common arithmetic and common

experience; and although some persons have insisted to high heaven

that the tables cannot possibly work, those thus far tested have in

fact proved to be efficient, as indicated in the report by Mrs. Glueck.

It remains for the framers of highly sophisticated predictive devices to

demonstrate pragmatically, and through validations by neutral in-

vestigators working with a variety of samples of cases, that the

application of the mathematical refinements suggested by various

171

theoretical preconceptions has in fact improved the practical effi-

ciency of predictive instruments. In this matter what will determine

the issue is not so much mathematical theorising as the pragmatic

test expressed in the proverb that “the proof of the pudding is in the

eating”’.

(c) The final problem in the matter of i

inproving prediction devices

is the need of validation of the experience tables. As Monachesi,

Scott, Ohlin, Wilkins and Mrs. Glueck suggest, without a check-up

on other samples of cases than the one on which the original table

has been built, it is impossible to say whether it is merely an “‘experi-

ence table” recording past events respecting a particular group of

cases, or a truly predictive instrument, having the power to prognos-

ticate future conduct in other cases. Mrs. Glueck emphasises the

value of testing prediction tables on samples varying, in such respects

as urban or rural residence, residence in different states, ethnic

derivation, religion, economic status and even sex, from the samples

of cases on which a prediction table is founded; and she reports in

detail on the validations thus far made of the Glueck tables. Mona-

chesi and Ohlin discuss these and many other validations. In this

report it is of interest to mention that the Glueck Social Prediction

Table, designed to predict delinquency on the part of children, which

is presently being applied in two public schools in New York City,

had previously been successfully validated on several different

samples of delinquents varying in many respects from those involved

in the construction of the tables; and in the two major validations it

has been established that the factors in question could have success-

fully selected the delinquents in nine-tenths of the cases.! The Glueck

table pertaining to criminalism of former delinquents while serving

in the armed forces has also been successfully validated, it having

been shown that that predictive instrument could have selected 85 per

cent of the offenders as clear military risks.2 These are straws in the

wind which suggest that other validations will also be successful.

t 3

%*

x

1 See the report by Eleanor T. Glueck to the Congress “‘Status of Glueck Pre-

diction Studies”, a Summary Report to the International Congress on Crimi-

nology, London, September, 1955; see also Thompson, R. E., “A Validation of

the Glueck Social Prediction Scale for Proneness to Delinquency”, J. of Crim.

Law, Criminology, and Police Science, Vol. 43 (Nov.-Dec., 1952), pp. 451-

470; Axelrad, S., and Glick, S. J., “Application of the Glueck Social Prediction

Table to 100 Jewish Delinquent Boys™, The Jewish Social Quarterly, Vol. XXX

(Winter, 1953), 127-136; Black, B. J. and Glick, S. J., “Predicted vs. Actual Out-

come for Delinquent Boys™”, New York, The Jewish Board of Guardians, 1952.

3 Schneider, A. J. N., LaGrone, Jr., C. W., Glueck, E. T. and S., “Prediction

of Behaviour of Civilian Delinquents in the Armed Forces”, Mental Hygiene,

Vol. 28, No. 3, July, 1944.

172

There remains the duty of summarising those recommendations

suggested by the analysis that might form the subject of resolutions of

the Congress.

6. RESOLUTIONS ON PROGNOSIS OF RECIDIVISM TO BE PRESENTED

TO THE CONGRESS

Section 4, on the Prognosis of Recidivism, proposes the following

Resolutions to the Congress:

I. That it is important for the various countries to develop stan-

dard definitions of recidivism in its different aspects, and to improve

their means for the gathering of statistics of recidivism.

II. That fundamental attention should be paid by legislators,

judges, correctional officials, clinicians and researchers in criminology

to the problem of recidivism as an outstanding issue in the adminis-

tration of criminal justice and in the understanding of the etiology

and prevention of delinquency and criminalism.

III. That the prognosis of redicivism as well as of original delin-

quency can be greatly improved through the aid of prediction tables

based on a demonstrated high relationship between certain per-

sonality, character and socio-cultural factors and varieties of conduct.

IV. That preventive agencies, and institutions and personnel of

criminal justice, should be encouraged to use prediction tables as aids

in coping with the problems of prevention, individualisation, classifi-

cation and peno-correctional treatment; it being clearly understood

that such tables should not be used blindly or mechanically but rather

as additional instruments in the process of individualisation based on

the professional experience and insight of judges, correctional

authorities and clinicians.

V. That the utmost care needs to be taken in the definition, assem-

bling and verification of the factors which form the basic data on

which prediction tables are built, and in checking up on the actual

extent of recidivism as related to such factors.

VI. That an indispensable aspect of improved prognostic tech-

nique is the validation of the predictive instrument on samples of

cases other than that on which it was constructed, in order to trans-

form it from an “experience table” dealing with past events, into a

true prediction table dealing with future events.

173

NOTE ON A LEGAL (CONSTITUTIONAL) OBJECTION TO THE USE OF

PREDICTION TABLES

Overbeek raises the legal (constitutional) objection that a judge

is not permitted to avail himself of secret documents to which the

accused and his counsel have no access. This is true; but there is

nothing secret about a prediction table or the information on which

the individual convict is scored for the purpose of considering his case

in the light of past experience with numerous other cases. There is no

objection, except the practical one, to permitting access to these.

Even under the existing practice the judge’s choice of alternatives

among permitted sentences is not guided solely by the facts in the

single case before him but must inevitably also be based on his

experience with many prior cases to which the accused and counsel

do not have access. It must be borne in mind that the issue is not that

of guilt or innocence, a finding already made by the time the sentence

is to be imposed, but of the nature and length of the sentence where

the law gives the judge discretion. In Williams v. New York, 337 U.S.

241, 69 S. Ct. 1079, 93 L. Ed. 1337 (1949), a jury found Williams

guilty of first degree murder and recommended life imprisonment.

The law provided that in such a case the Court may impose a life

sentence but is not bound to do so, a provision as to which the judge

had instructed the jury. The New York Criminal Code provides that

“Before rendering judgment or pronouncing sentence the court shall

cause the defendant’s previous criminal record to be submitted to it,

including any reports that may have been made as a result of a

mental, psychiatric or physical examination on such person, and may

seek any information that will aid the court in determining the proper

treatment of such defendant”. After conviction, the judge, in open

court, gave the reasons why he was imposing the death sentence,

stating that since the trial he had obtained additional information

about Williams from the Probation Department and through other

sources which, “though relevant to the question of punishment could

not properly have been brought to the attention of the jury in its

consideration of the question of guilt”, including the commission of

thirty burglaries in the vicinity of the murder and certain activities

showing that Williams possessed a “morbid sexuality” and was a

“menace to society”’. Rejecting the argument that the statute under

which the judge acted violates the “due process” clause of the Four-

teenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States in that

the death sentence was based on secret information from witnesses

with whom Williams had not been confronted for the purpose of

174

cross-examination and rebuttal, the New York Court of Appeal

affirmed the trial judge’s power of discretion and the sentence. In sus-

taining the New York Court, the Supreme Court of the United States

(with two justices dissenting) said, through Mr. Justice Black: “To

deprive sentencing judges of this kind of information would under-

mine modern penological procedural policies that have been

cautiously adopted by the nation after careful consideration and

experimentation”, and that “The due-process clause should not be

treated as a device for freezing the evidential procedure of sentencing

in the mould of trial procedure’, because “So to treat the due-process

clause would hinder if not preclude all courts—state and federal—

from making progressive efforts to improve the administration of

criminal justice.”

175

SECTION V

LE TRAITEMENT DES RECIDIVISTES

par Charles Germain

A. OBSERVATIONS GENERALES SUR LE TRAITEMENT

DU RECIDIVISME

1

Lorsqu’on envisage le probléme criminologique et socio-

logique qu’est le récidivisme, on voit que les moyens propres a lutter

contre ce fléau sont de deux ordres, les moyens préventifs et les

moyens curatifs.

Ces moyens sont de valeur trés inégale, et il n’est pas douteux

qu’en ce qui concerne leur efficacité, les premiers devraient avoir une

importance infiniment plus grande que les seconds. “Mieux vaut

prévenir que guérir’, peut-on répéter au sujet des délinquants

menacés de contracter ’habitude criminelle. Mais on peut aussi se

demander dans quelle mesure I’Etat est capable de modifier des

facteurs familiaux, culturels et économiques de mani¢re 3 diminuer

le taux de la criminalité. On doit se demander d’autre part dans

quelle mesure les pouvoirs publics sont fondés a intervenir pour

déceler d’abord, arréter ou freiner ensuite, le penchant criminel,

avant méme la commission de tout délit. Le point qui doit retenir

plus particuliérement notre attention a trait a ’organisation, au profit

du délinquant condamné pour la premiére fois, d’un traitement sus-

ceptible, aussi bien de le détourner de la tendance délictuelle dont 1l

pourrait déja présenter des symptomes, que d’éviter qu’il n’acquiere

cette tendance au cours de I’exécution de sa premiére peine. Nous y

reviendrons par la suite.

2. 11 y a une question qui ne manque jamais d’€tre soulevée

a propos du traitement du récidivisme: ¢’est celle de la distinction

entre la peine et la mesure de stireté. C’est une question épineuse. Il est

vain de vouloir I’aborder dans un congrés international parce qu’elle

conduit A des dissertations interminables, parce que les adversaires en

présence ne veulent jamais abandonner leurs positions respectives,

et parce qu’d défaut d’accord sur les idées, on finit toujours par se

contenter d’un accord sur une formule transactionnelle qui, sans

trancher le nceud de la question, n’est pas pour autant nécessairement

176

satisfaisante.! Au surplus, il serait particulitrement inopportun de

reprendre cette discussion précisément sur le sol anglais ou 'expres-

sion mesure de sureté n’a pas droit de cité bien qu’a vrai dire la chose

existe puisque, par exemple, corrective training et preventive detention

répondent bien & I'idée que s’en font les partisans de cette mesure.

Enfin, le role du congrés n’est pas de prendre parti sur un point de

pure doctrine posé A propos du traitement du récidivisme, mais bien

de se prononcer sur la valeur des techniques législatives et adminis-

tratives employées ou préconisées pour ce traitement.

ASPECT LEGISLATIF

3. Sur le plan législatif, on rencontre d’abord des dispositions qui

édictent des pénalités accrues pour sanctionner le délit commis en

état de récidive soit spéciale, soit générale. Mais ’hypothese ainsi

envisagée est celle de la récidive légale, qui reléve de la pure technique

juridique et non pas celle du récidivisme qui est une réalité criminolo-

gique.?

4. A coté de cette premilre catégoric de textes d’inspiration

purement répressive et dépourvus d’intérét pour la solution du pro-

bléme qui nous est soumis, on trouve des lois qui prescrivent des

mesures particuliéres appropriées a certaines situations criminogenes

déterminées telles que le vagabondage, la mendicité, la prostitution,

I’alcoolisme, I'usage des stupéfiants. Certaines de ces mesures sont

susceptibles d’intervenir en ’absence méme de tout délit. A ce titre,

1 C’est ce qui s’est passé au Congreés de La Haye en 1950. Dans son remar-

quable rapport général, M. Beleza dos Santos était arrivé a la conclusion que

“les dispositions pénales sur la récidive ne sont pas suffisantes pour lutter

efficacement contre la délinquance d’habitude” et qu’ *il faut recourir a cet effet

aux mesures de siireté” (Actes du Congres, volume 1, p. 155). Cette référence

aux mesures de sireté ayant soulevé les difficultés habituelles, le Congrés a

adopté la formule suivante: ‘“La peine traditionnelle n’est pas suffisante pour

lutter efficacement contre la criminalité d’habitude. Il faut donc recourir a

d’autres mesures appropriées”. (Actes, Vol. 1, p. 237.)

Mais que faut-il entendre par peine traditionnelle? S’agit-il de la peine ex-

piatoire telle qu’on la concevait au siécle dernier, par opposition a la peine

rééducative qui tend a I'emporter aujourd’hui? En ce cas, on peur dire que la

peine traditionnelle, en effet insuffisante pour lutter contre la criminalité d’habi-

tude, s’est également révélée inefficace pour lutter contre les formes moins

aigués de la délinquance, et que c’est précisément 1’échec de I’ancienne concep-

tion et de I’'ancien mode d’exécution de la peine privative de liberté qui a entrainé

Ia création de la grande variété des traitements pénitentiaires caractéristique de

I’époque contemporaine.

? José Beleza dos Santos “Récidivistes et délinquants d’habitude”, Revue de

science criminelle et de droit pénal comparé, 1954, pp. 687-712.

177

CC—-M

elles sont d’un grand intérét pour la prévention du récidivisme, et leur

généralisation apparait comme des plus souhaitables.

5. D’autres textes encore se proposent d’éviter que la tendance

délictuelle ne prenne naissance ou ne se développe a ’occasion de

I’exécution d’une peine privative de liberté. Les lois relatives a ’enfance

délinquante répondent a cette préoccupation. Il en est de méme des

institutions comme le sursis et la probation et des diverses mesures

imaginées pour remplacer les courtes peines d’emprisonnement.

6. Les lois concernant les délinquants mentalement anormaux

peuvent étre rangées sous la méme rubrique en ce sens que si les

intéressés sont soustraits a I’application des pénalités habituelles, c’est

pour empécher que celles-ci ne viennent accentuer encore leur incli-

nation criminelle en méme temps que leurs anomalies psychiques.

7. L’ensemble de ces dispositions législatives mérite une atten-

tion particuliére en raison de 'importance qu’elles revétent dans la

lutte contre le récidivisme.

8. On en arrive enfin a la législation spéciale a ceux que nous

désignerons sous le terme générique de délinquants d’habitude. Sur ces

textes qui s’attachent de prés au probléme du récidivisme, nous dispo-

sons, grace 4 la Commission Internationale Pénale et Pénitentiaire!

et a la Société Internationale de Criminologie,2 d’une documentation

considérable® qui vient encore d’étre enrichie par les rapports natio-

naux établis en vue du Congrés de Criminologie de Londres.* Cette

documentation met en relief plusieurs grandes questions de politique

criminelle qui ne sont pas nouvelles mais sur lesquelles néanmoins le

Congreés voudra sans doute affirmer sa position.

9. L’une de ces questions a trait a la technique 1égale de déter-

mination des cas dans lesquels on peut considérer qu’il existe une ten-

dance délictuelle justifiant le recours & des mesures dérogatoires au

droit commun de la peine. Trois systémes se partagent la faveur des

différentes législations.®

1 Recueil des documents en matiére pénale et pénitentiaire (Bulletin de la

C.I.P.P.), Vol. XIII (année 1947), pp. 1-120, 171-7, 243-55, 382-96. Vol. X1V

(année 1948), pp. 73-182.

Actes de XIle Congrés international pénal et pénitentiaire, La Haye, 1950,

Vol. I, pp. 152-68, 192-210, 236-8, 472-8, 626-8. Vol. 1I, pp. 139-55, 177-94,

220-1, 442-8, 588-90. Vol. 1V, pp. 169-351.

2 Deuxiéme Cours international de criminologic: Le probléme de I’état dangereux.

Imprimerie administrative de Melun, 1954 (632 pages).

3 Voir également Norval Morris, The Habitual Criminal, Longmans, Green and

Co., London, 1951 (395 pages).

4 Voir enfin les études publiées dans les deux premiers numéros de I’année

1955 de la Revue internationale de droit pénal, a I’occasion du Congres.

. I .

. .

5J. B. Herzog, “‘Du multirécidivisme a la délinquance d’habitude”, Revue

internationale de droit pénal, 1953, pp. 519-33,

178

Dans un premier systéme, qui €tait celui de la loi frangaise de 1885

sur la relégation, le législateur s’en tient & un critére purement objec-

tif pour édicter une présomption absolue de récidivisme fondée sur les

condamnations déjad encourues par le délinquant. Ce systéme n’est

pas recommandable:! il ne permet pas au juge de faire la discrimina-

tion pourtant nécessaire entre, d’une part, le sujet qui malgré la

réitération d’infractions peut toujours €tre assimilé a un délinquant

occasionnel parce qu’il n’est pas atteint d’'un penchant qui doit

’amener au récidivisme et, d’autre part, le délinquant chez lequel la

rechute témoigne d’une prédisposition véritable a la criminalité.

Un deuxiéme systéme conserve le critére objectif sur le nombre et

la qualification des infractions et des peines antérieures, mais fait

intervenir en méme temps un critére subjectif. En d’autres termes, le

délinquant ne peut €tre astreint a la mesure spéciale que s’il a com-

mis les infractions multiples spécifiées par la loi, mais le juge n’édic-

tera cette mesure que lorsqu’il sera convaincu de I’existence d’une

véritable habitude criminelle? et plusieurs législations exigent dans

certains cas que le tribunal se prononce sur ce point par une déclara-

tion formelle.3

Enfin, dans un troisi¢éme systéme, la constatation du penchant au

crime peut provoquer, dés la premiére infraction, I’imposition de la

mesure prévue a I’égard des délinquants d’habitude.4

A cette question se rattache celle de savoir si, en dehors de Pinter-

nement préventif des aliénés, et abstraction faite aussi des dispositions

preéventives a caractére nettement curatif déja signalées a propos des

vagabonds, alcooliques, etc., le Iégislateur est fondé & prendre, avant

méme toute infraction a la loi pénale, des mesures de protection a

Pégard de certains sujets pour lesquels il existe un pronostic de

récidivisme. Nous nous bornerons a rappeler, & ce propos, que

Iinstitution des mesures ante delictum est contraire au principe de la

légalité des délits et des peines auquel la plupart des législations

demeurent attachées.

! L’automatisme judiciaire a été supprimé en France par la loi du 3 juillet 1954

qui a rendu le prononcé de la relégation facultatif pour le juge. 1l subsiste en

Belgique pour la récidive de crime sur crime, en Italie et au Portugal également

dans les situations les plus graves.

? Cest le systtme de la loi belge de défense sociale de 1930 (sauf le cas déja

signalé de la récidive de crime sur crime), de la loi anglaise de 1948 pour la

preventive detention, du nouveau code pénal hellénique entré en vigueur le 1¢r jan-

vier 1951. C’est devenu — implicitement — le systéme frangais depuis la loi du

3 juillet 1954,

tions en ce sens.

* Les législations portugaise et italienne notamment contiennent des disposi-

‘11 en est ainsi dans le cas particulier du “délinquant par tendance” de I’article

108 du Code pénal italien.

179

10. Un autre point sur lequel il a été beaucoup insisté au cours des

derniéres années concerne la nécessité de soumettre 3 une observation

criminologique approfondie! les délinquants au sujet desquels se

pose la question du récidivisme. Cette observation a lieu assez

généralement au cours du traitement par suite d’une pratique

administrative qui se passe de I’appui du législateur. Mais elle n’est

pas moins nécessaire au stade du jugement pour permettre au

tribunal de se prononcer 4 bon escient sur la tendance criminelle du

délinquant. Or, ’examen scientifique avant la sentence souléve, sur-

tout dans le droit continental européen, un certain nombre de diffi-

cultés qui ne peuvent étre résolues sans le concours de la loi. Le

Congres appréciera I'opportunité d’affirmer a son tour le trés grand

intérét des investigations d’ordre bio-psychologique et social:

des avant le prononcé de la sentence;

pendant tout le processus de I’exécution de la mesure, que le trai-

tement soit appliqué en institution au en milieu libre;

pendant la durée de I’assistance post-pénale au cours de laquelle

le délinquant tente sa chance de réadaptation sociale.

Le Congres devra aussi se prononcer sur I’utilisation qui peut étre

faite des tables de prédiction? au moment de la sentence® et au

moment ou se pose la question de la libération.

11. Non moins important est le point de savoir si la mesure

spéciale édictée envers le délinquant d’habitude doit se substituer a

la pénalité habituelle prévue pour le délit ou si elle doit en étre le

complément.

“Le systtme dualiste,” dit la résolution adoptée au Congrés de

La Haye, “n’est pas recommandable. La mesure spéciale ne doit pas

étre ajoutée A une peine. On doit appliquer une mesure unifiée.”

De son coté, le VI®° Congres international de droit pénal tenu en

1953 3 Rome a exprimé le veeu que ““les futures réformes de la légis-

lation pénale s’inspirent autant que possible de principes selon

lesquels, au lieu d’ajouter a la peine une mesure de siireté distincte et

de soumettre ainsi le sujet a divers traitements successifs, on fixerait

1 Cycle d’études de Bruxelles de décembre 1951, consacré a I’examen médico-

psychologique et social des délinquants (United Nations, International Review

of Criminal Policy, No. 3, January 1953), et Premier cours international de

criminologie enseigné a Paris en septembre et octobre 1952 sur le méme sujet

(Imprimerie administrative de Melun, 1953).

2 Jean Pinatel, ““L’état dangereux a travers I’étude statistique du récidivisme

ct les tables de prédiction”, dans Deuxiéme cours international de criminologie,

op. cit., pp. 283-94.

3 W. H. Overbeek, Quelques remarques sur le pronostic du récidivisme (1953).

180

dés le premier moment un traitement qui, dans toute la mesure du

possible,

serait

unitaire et adapté aux diverses

catégories

d’individus.”

Il parait inutile de revenir sur les nombreuses objections doctri-

nales et pratiques faites au systéme de 1’application successive de la

pénalité habituelle et de la mesure spéciale, et nous pensons que le

Congres voudra donner ses préférences au systéme unitaire qui

I’emporte d’ailleurs dans les législations les plus récentes.

12. Le cas des délinquants exposés au récidivisme appelle, non

pas une mesure uniformément applicable a tous, mais des mesures

distinctes adaptées aux différents types criminologiques.

Lorsque le récidivisme a son origine dans I’état d’anormalité men-

tale du sujet, il est préférable de prévoir une mesure légale particu-

liere qui aura pour premier objectif la guérison du délinquant. C’est

I’occasion de rappeler que dans certains pays ou il existe une mesure

spéciale pour les récidivistes dangereux et une autre pour les anor-

maux dangereux, le texte concernant les premiers finit par tomber en

désuétude parce que les tribunaux font rentrer dans le champ d’appli-

cation du second les récidivistes auxquels ils préférent reconnaitre

ainsi la qualité d’anormaux.

Le degré d’amendabilité peut également constituer le critére de

la distinction entre les deux mesures,! et lorsque cette distinction

n’est pas faite dans la loi, il arrive que la pratique pénitentiaire I’éta-

blisse de son propre mouvement,? se conformant ainsi au veeu du

Congres de La Haye aux termes duquel “il est recommandable, en ce

qui concerne le traitement des délinquants, d’habitude qui doivent

€tre internés, de séparer les jeunes délinquants des adultes et les

délinquants plus dangereux et plus réfractaires 3 ’amendement de

ceux qui le sont moins”’.

13. La question de la durée de la mesure se rattache a celle

de la sentence indéterminée sur laquelle nous renvoyons a I’étude

entreprise en qualité d’expert consultant des Nations Unies par M.

Marc Ancel.? Au point de vue qui nous intéresse, la conclusion qui se

dégage de cette étude confirme celle du Congrés de La Haye: pour

ceux qui sont “naturellement portés & commettre des infractions”, il

! Cest le cas de I’Angleterre qui applique le corrective training aux récidivistes

pour lesquels il existe encore un espoir qu’ils puissent réagir favorablement 2

une éducation appropriée, la preventive detention étant réservée aux cas dans

lesquels le type résolument antisocial du délinquant ne permet pas de formuler

un pronostic favorable.

2 C’est ce qui se passe notamment en France et en Belgique avec la différencia-

tion pénitentiaire entre asociaux et antisociaux.

% La sentence indéterminée. Publications des Nations Unies. ST/SOA/SD/2,

novembre 1953 (105 pages).

181

convient d’adopter une mesure d’une durée indéterminée. Cependant,

cette indétermination ne doit pas étre absolue parce que, de I’avis

général, elle se révéle alors nuisible au traitement en raison des réac-

tions hostiles des détenus. Par contre, 'indétermination relative peut

au cours du traitement étre utilisée comme un “‘levier de I’amende-

ment”’. En d’autres termes, il est souhaitable de prévoir, peut-€tre un

minimum, mais trés certainement un maximum dans la limite

desquels l'autorité responsable de la libération aura la faculté de

choisir le moment socialement et psychologiquement le plus propice

pour mettre fin a la mesure.

14. En ce qui concerne le choix de ce moment, la détermina-

tion de 'autorité chargée d’en décider, la nature et les effets de la

décision, il suffira d’indiquer que la tendance générale va vers une

libération conditionnelle sélective intervenant au vu du pronostic

favorable formulé a4 la suite d’une observation criminologique pro-

longée; que la décision devrait appartenir & une autorité impartiale et

compétente (autorité administrative, autorité judiciaire ou organisme

mixte groupant des experts sous la présidence ou tout au moins avec

la participation d’un juge); que le libéré doit pouvoir compter sur

une assistance post-pénale efficace pour s’intégrer de nouveau dans

la société libre; enfin que dans le cas ou la condamnation a entrainé

certaines incapacités, la loi doit prévoir, aprés I’expiration d’un délai

raisonnable, la possibilité d’une réhabilitation, au besoin progressive,

emportant réintégration dans la plénitude des droits civils et

f

politiques.

ASPECT ADMINISTRATIF

15. La loi ne suffit pas a résoudre le probléme du traitement. Elle

se borne 4 poser des régles générales; son objet est de construire le

cadre légal a l'intérieur duquel va s’exercer ’action administrative

qui a une importance primordiale en mati¢re de traitement.

16. Lorsqu’on quitte le domaine de la loi pour pénétrer sur le

terrain de la pratique administrative, on pourrait s’attendre a trouver

des initiatives, des expériences, des réformes qui, dans le traitement

du récidivisme, marqueraient une différence fondamentale avec le

traitement de la délinquance en général.

Telle n’est pourtant pas I'impression que 1’on recueille en regardant

de prés ce qui se passe dans les différents pays.

On sait qu’aprés trois années de recherches et d’enquétes a travers

le monde, la Fondation Internationale Pénale et Pénitentiaire vient de

publier une étude de P'Institut de droit comparé de I’Université de

182

Paris sur les méthodes modernes de traitement pénitentiaire.! Or,

dans cette étude, qui constitue une synthése des réalisations et des

tendances actuelles en cette matiére, on ne trouve nulle part confir-

mation de I'idée selon laquelle le traitement du récidivisme se ferait

par des moyens différents de ceux employés pour le traitement de la

délinquance ordinaire. Tout au contraire, les auteurs ont pris soin de

souligner que pour rendre compte de la réalité pénitentiaire actuelle,

ils devaient traiter indistinctement et sur le méme plan tout a la fois

des peines et des mesures de siireté.? Et il est de fait que partout,

les méthodes variées que I’Administration s’ingénie a adapter a la

personnalité des délinquants sont appliquées dans I’'un comme dans

I’autre cas. La raison en est donnée de fagon pertinente par Sir Lionel

Fox a propos des délinquants d’habitude: “In a prison system in

which there is a complete system of classification, providing different

methods of training and forms of custody appropriate to different

categories of prisoners, the provision of a régime appropriate to

habitual criminals detained for very long periods requires no more

than the application to the particular case of the general principles

of the system which inciude due regard to the purpose for which the

sentence was awarded”’.3

En admettant que dans le deux hypothéses envisagées du délin-

quant ordinaire et du délinquant d’habitude, le but consiste pareille-

ment a réadapter le sujet en le détournant du chemin du crime, le

traitement va prendre le méme caractére rééducatif. Et il n’y aura rien

d’étonnant des lors a ce que les techniques employées a cet effet dans

les deux cas solent similaires, alors surtout que, comme certains crim-

inologues? n’ont pas manqué de le faire observer a la suite des tra-

vaux des Glueck, les facteurs (endogenes et exogénes) qui conduisent

au recidivisme sont ceux-la mémes qui sont a 'origine du premier

délit.

17. Nous allons par conséquent retrouver dans le traitement

! Les méthodes modernes de traitement pénitentiaire. Imprimerie administrative

de Melun, 1955 (158 pages).

*L’idée que le rézime pénitentiaire des délinquants d’habitude s’identifie

pratiquement avec cclui des délinquants ordinaires est affirmée en Angleterre

par Radzinowicz ("The persistent offendes”, d

b

ans The modern approach to

criminal law, Cambridge, 1945, p. 165) et par Griinhut (Penal Reform, Oxford,

1948, pp. 399 et 402) et sur le continent européen, notamment par Paul Cornil

(*‘Le probleme de I'unification de la peine et des mesures de siireté’’, Revue inter-

nationale de droit pénal, 1953, pp. 493-503), Strahl (‘‘Le probléme de I'unifica-

tion des peines et des mesures de stireté” meme revue, pp. 643-50) et Germain

(Le traitement des récidivistes en France

, Imprimerie administrative de Melun,

1953).

3 Sir Lionel Fox, The English Prison and Borstal S ystems (London, 1952), p. 305.

* Edwin H. Sutherland, Principles of Criminology (Philadelphia, 1939), p. 586.

183

pénitentiaire du récidivisme toutes les méthodes utilisées a ’égard de

I’ensemble des délinquants, c’est-a-dire:?!

(a) les procédés pédagogiques uéuels qui ne sont guere

différents de ceux employés dans la vie libre pour

I’éducation des non-délinquants: travail, instruction

générale et professionnelle,

activités culturelles et

sportives:

(b) les techniques spécifiquement pénitentiaires:

de la sériation et de la classification des sujets en vue

de la constitution de groupes de traitements que ’on

voudrait numériquement peu élevés pour le succes de

I’entreprise;

du régime progressif qui, dans sa nouvelle conception,

est fondé sur I’ascension morale du détenu et qui tend

progressivement vers la reconnaissance d’un certain

self-government;

de la pratique des congés, de la semi-liberté et de la

liberté conditionnelle;

du régime des établissements ouverts et de certainesformes

de la probation envisagée comme partie intégrante

du systéme pénitentiaire dans un sens large, le recours a

ces deux derniéres méthodes devenant d’ailleurs de plus

en plus prudent au fur et & mesure de I’installation du

suyjet dans la délinquance chronique;

(c) I'idée directrice d’une transformation morale par la suppres-

sion ou, les cas échéant, la ‘““sublimation’’ de certaines ten-

dances et I'utilisation des ‘“‘virtualités positives’ qui sub-

sistent chez le pire criminel, afin d’éveiller son sens de la

responsabilité envers lui-méme et envers la société et de

provoquer son concours spirituel a I’ceuvre de redresse-

ment entreprise a son égard;

(d) la recherche, avec le monde extérieur, de contacts utiles sus-

ceptibles d’étre exploités a des fins de réadaptation

sociale;

(e) pour ’exécution de ce programme de traitement, 'utilisa-

tion toujours plus large d’un personnel qualifié de pro-

fessionnels de I’enseignement, de moniteurs techniques,

d’éducateurs, de sociologues et de travailleurs sociaux,

ainsi que de psychologues et de psychiatres, avec la

collaboration traditionnelle des aumoniers, celle des

1 Voir sur tous ces points I’étude visée a la note 1, p. 183.

184

visiteurs bénévoles des prisons et, dans certains pays, le

concours de représentants du pouvoir judiciaire.

18. En ce qui concerné les méthodes relevant des sciences médi-

cales, nous avons déja signalé en passant les cures auxquelles peuvent

étre astreints les alcooliques et autres intoxiqués. Mais cet aspect du

probléme est de la compétence du Dr. Stiirup auquel il appartiendra

au surplus d’exposer au Congrés comment se pose la question de

certaines techniques telles que la psychanalyse et la narcoanalyse, la

psychothérapie de groupe, I’endocrino-thérapie, la castration,! la

lobotomie. . ..

~ 1 Sur cette question, voir les discussions et les rapports préparatoires au XI¢

Congrés international pénal et pénitentiaire tenu en 1935 a Berlin. Actes du

Congreés, Vol. 1 a, pp. 313-61, 495-511, Vol. II b, pp. 52 et 53, Vol. 1V, pp. 1-92.

Voir également Hermann Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruc-

tion (London, 1946), pp. 19-36, et les nombreuses études du Dr. Georg K.

Stiirup, notamment “‘Sexual offenders and their treatment in Denmark and the

other Scandinavian countries”, International Review of Criminal Policy (United

Nations), No. 4, Juiry 1953, pp. 1-19. Rapprocher dans le méme numéro de

cette revue, pp. 20-39, Karl H. Bowman, “Review of sex legislation and the

control of sex offenders in the United States of America.”

185

B. ANALYSE DES RAPPORTS NATIONAUX PREPARES

EN VUE DU CONGRES

19. Le Comité d’organisation nous a communiqué 14 rapports

nationaux et études particuliéres qui émanent des pays et auteurs

suivants:

AFRIQUE DU SUD

Dr. J. H. Venter, professeur de criminologie a I’Université de Pre-

toria.

ANGLETERRE

M. Duncan Fairn, directeur de ’administration des prisons d’An-

gleterre et du Pays de Galles, Londres.

Dr. John C. Mackwood, psychologue a la prison de Wormwood

Scrubs, Londres.

M. R. S. Taylor, premier psychologue a la prison de Wandsworth,

Londres.

BELGIQUE

M. Van Helmont, inspecteur général des établissements péniten-

tiaires et de défense sociale au nlinistér¢ de la Justice, Bruxelles.

CUBA

Rapport commun du Dr. Francisco Chavez Milanés, membre hono-

raire de la Cour Supréme de Justice et du Dr. Francisco Lancis y

Sanchez, professeur agrégé de la chaire de médecine 1égale et de

toxicologie a I'Université de La Havane, tous deux membres titulaires

de I’Institut national de criminologie.

ETATS-UNIS D’AMERIQUE

M. Paul W. Tappan, professeur de sociologie a I’Université de

New York.

FRANCE

M. Pierre Cannat, sous-directeur de I’administration pénitentiaire

au ministére de la Justice, Paris.

- M. Roger Vienne, vice-président au Tribunal de Lille.

186

GRECE

M. Char. Triantaphyllidis, directeur général de I’administration

pénitentiaire et de I'éducation surveillée au ministére de la J ustice,

Athénes.

IRAK

Dr. Abdul Jalil Pertow, président de la Cour d’appel de Bagdad.

ITALIE

M. le Professeur Benigno di Tullio, directeur de I’Institut d’anthro-

pologie criminelle prés 'Université de Rome.

NORVEGE

M. Johannés Andenaes, professeur de droit criminel & I’Université

d’Oslo.

TURQUIE

M. Nurullah Kunter, professeur de droit criminel & I'Université

d’Istamboul.

20. La premiére remarque a faire au sujet des rapports, c’est

qu’a deux exceptions prés, tous les pays dont ils émanent ont dans

leur arsenal législatif des dispositions spécialement congues a 1’égard

des récidivistes dangereux.

Les exceptions concernent I’Irak, dont le rapporteur exprime d’ail-

leurs le veeu d’une modification de sa législation nationale sur ce

point, et la Turquie, pour laquelle M. Kunter énumeére un certain

nombre de lacunes et d’imperfections 1égislatives qu’il n’hésite pas a

considérer comme autant de facteurs de récidivisme.

Il est piquant de relever a l’inverse les observations des deux

rapporteurs cubains sur la vanité des dispositions légales méme les

meilleures lorsque, comme dans leur pays, elles demeurent lettre

morte dans la pratique.

A propos des Etats-Unis, il convient de signaler qu’en sa qualité

de rapporteur a I’American Law Institute qui est chargé d’élaborer

le texte d’un projet de code pénal pour I'ensemble des 48 Etats

de I’Union, le professeur Tappan a suggéré d’établir des mesures dis-

tinctes, d’une part, pour les récidivistes actuels, d’autre part pour les

délinquants “dont I’état psychologique indique un danger de crimi-

nalité répétée”.

21. En ce qui concerne les conditions auxquelles est subordonné

le prononcé de la mesure applicable aux délinquants d’habitude, la

lecture des rapports nationaux fait apparaitre:

187

que dans aucun des pays envisagés, il n’existe de mesure ante

delictum;

que le droit norvégien permet I'imposition de la mesure a I’égard

du délinquant primaire dans le cas ou il est reconnu coupable de

deux au moins des infractions spécifiées par la loi, alors que les

1égislations anglaise, belge, frangaise,! hellénique et sud-africaine

posent des conditions objectives plus rigoureuses et exigent

notamment que le délinquant soit en état de récidive légale;

que le juge conserve la faculté d’apprécier s’il doit imposer la

mesure lorsque les conditions prévues par la loi sont remplies.?

22. Aucun rapport ne fait état d’une obligation légale de ren-

seigner le juge sur le risque de récidivisme chez le délinquant traduit

devant lui.

M. Taylor signale qu’en matiére de corrective training, le juge

recoit un rapport de ’administration appuyé d’un certificat médical

sur ’aptitude du sujet 4 €tre soumis & cette mesure éducative.

M. Pertow préconise la création de centres d’observation. M.

Venter voudrait que spécialement pour les crimes d’une certaine

gravité, le tribunal soit renseigné sur ’accusé au moins par le rap-

port d’un agent de probation. M. Yan Helmont insiste avec force sur

le fait que le pouvoir d’appréciation laissé au juge ‘““a pour corollaire

la double nécessité d’informer au mieux ’autorité judiciaire avant le

jugement sur la personnalité médico-psychologique et sociale du

délinquant, et de prévoir la spécialisation du juge pénal”, et le

rapporteur sudafricain demande de son c6té que les magistrats

recoivent une formation criminologique, psychologique et socio-

logique. M. Kunter déplore pour son pays I’absence de ’examen de

personnalité et souhaite la spécialisation des magistrats.

73. Plusieurs rapports nous donnent des exemples d’une diffé-

renciation légale plus poussée des mesures destinées a lutter contre le

récidivisme.

C’est ainsi que les rapporteurs anglais fournissent des précisions

intéressantes sur les deux institutions prévues a IP’article 21 du

1 Pourtant, la loi frangaise permet de condamner a la relégation le délinquant

primaire convaincu de s’étre livré habituellement 3 des manceuvres abortives.

Rapprocher pour le Portugal, Beleza dos Santos, méme référence qu’a la note 2,

page 703.

3]f y a lieu pourtant de signaler une exception dans la législation italienne

(voir le rapport du professeur Grispigni au Congrés de La Haye. Actes, Vol. 1V,

p. 242), comme d’ailleurs dans le droit portugais (rapport général du professeur

Beleza dos Santos, méme référence, p. 174) et dans le droit belge (voir note 2

page 163).

188

Criminal Justice Act de 1948 sous les appellations de corrective training

et de preventive detention et qui sont destinées, comme I’'indique M.

Duncan Fairn, la premi¢re & ceux des récidivistes chez lesquels la

tendance criminelle commence a se dessiner (M. Taylor les qualifie de

potential recidivists), et la seconde a ceux qui ont dépassé les premiers

stades du récidivisme. Et le docteur Mackwood croit pour I’avenir

a des mesures plus nuancées, notamment au profit des anormaux psy-

chiques.?

MM. M. Van Helmont, Triantaphyllidis et Andenaes signalent les

mesures particulieres prévues dans leurs législations respectives a

I’égard des délinquants prédisposés au récidivisme en raison de leur

état d’anormalité mentale et M. Andenaes montre comment, a

’instar de la pratique judiciaire suédoise, les tribunaux norvégiens

ont une tendance, du moins en matiére d’attentats contre les mceurs

et de crimes contre la propriété, a délaisser la sanction édictée a

I’égard des récidivistes dangereux au profit des mesures variées de

sécurité prévues pour les anormaux. Le méme rapporteur reléve en

outre la possibilité légale dans son pays d’appliguer les mesures de

sécurité, d’une part aux délinquants qui ont agi sous I'influence de

I’alcool, d’autre part, aux aliénés criminels irresponsables, aprés la

fin de leur internement psychiatrique. M. Andenaes fait également

etat, en ce qui concerne les jeunes adultes, de P'institution norvégienne

qu’il qualifie en anglais de training school dont il fait le rapproche-

ment avec le Borstal system britannique, et M. Triantaphyllidis nous

apprend qu’en Greéce, lorsque la récidive est due a des actes pouvant

étre attribués a la fainéantise du sujet ou 4 son penchant a I'incon-

duite, le délinquant, s’il n’est pas considéré autrement dangereux

pour la sécurité publique, est renvoyé, aprés I’expiration de la peine

a laquelle il a été condamné pour le fait, dans une maison de travail

pour une durée de un A cinq ans.

En France, deux lois récentes ont institué des mesures particuliéres

en ce qui concerne les personnes intoxiquées par les stupéfiants (loi du

24 décembre 1953) et les alcooliques dangereux pour autrui (loi du

15 avril 1954). D’autre part, le Centre d’études de défense sociale de

PInstitut de droit comparé de Paris vient d’élaborer, 4 la demande

des pouvoirs publics, le texte d’un avant-projet de loi sur les délin-

quants anormaux exposes a larécidive par suite de leur état mental.

24. Dans I’exemple cité pour la Gréce de la maison de travail,

la mesure spéciale s’ajoute i la peine ordinaire. La législation hellé-

nique prévoit d’autre part que pour les délinquants anormaux

! Sur cette question, voir Sir Norwood East, Society and the Criminal (London,

1949), pp. 22941,

189

dangereux, le tribunal fixe dans la méme sentence et parallélement a

Pinternement, une peine ordinaire privative de liberté, laquelle sera

exécutée a la place de I'internement lorsque celui-ci ne sera plus jugé

nécessaire a I’état psychique du condamné. Par contre, la “réclusion

indéterminée’ prévue a I’égard du délinquant d’habitude par I’article

90 du nouveau code pénal grec est subie a I’exclusion de toute autre

pénalité. Il en va de méme en Angleterre, depuis le Criminal Justice

Act de 1948, pour les mesures de corrective training et de preventive

detention et, a 'exception du Cap, les Etats de I’Union Sud-Africaine

pratiquent également le syst¢tme de la voie unique.! En ce qui con-

cerne la Norveége, M. Andenaes nous explique les raisons pour

lesquelles en 1929 le 1égislateur a estimé qu’avant de soumettre le

récidiviste dangereux a une mesure qu’il voulait dépourvue de tout

caractere pénal, il convenait de lui faire subir préalablement une

peine proprement dite. Mais le rapporteur norvégien ajoute que le

systeme ainsi adopté de la double voie a été sévérement critiqué et ne

correspond plus a ’opinion dominante de nos jours. Toujours pour

la Norvége, il convient de signaler les particularités relatives a

I'application des mesures de sécurité prévues pour les anormaux

mentaux. Le principe 1égal est 12 aussi celui de 1a double voie, mais il

peut y étre dérogé: avec I’accord du ministére public, le tribunal

s’abstiendra parfois de prononcer la peine proprement dite, et I’ad-

ministration pénitentiaire a toujours la faculté d’abandonner com-

plétement ou partiellement 'exécution de la peine pour passer a

I’exécution de la mesure de sécurité.

La Belgique, la France et I’Italie ont conservé ’ancien systéme

dualiste du cumul, mais il existe sur ce point un trés fort courant

moniste dans les trois pays dont les délégués ont ainsi pu voter la

résolution unitaire adoptée en 1953 au VI® Congres international de

droit pénal.

25. Les différents rapporteurs nationaux illustrent bien la variété

des solutions susceptibles d’étre retenues en ce qui concerne la

détermination de la durée de la mesure et des autorités qualifices

pour y mettre fin.

M. Venter se prononce en faveur du systéme de la sentence indé-

terminée, avec une indétermination relative comportant un minimum

et un maximum, et une libération conditionnelle suivie d’un traite-

ment post-pénitentiaire au cours de la période d’épreuve.

M. Tappan insiste lui aussi sur la nécessité de combiner la sentence

indéterminée avec la parole dont il souligne I'importance toute parti-

culiére en matiére de récidivisme en raison des inconvénients d’une

.

! Norval Morris,'op. cit., p. 162.

190

liberté immédiatement compléte ou d’une trop courte période de

liberté conditionnelle surveillée.!

M. Kunter regrette que le code pénal turc n’admette pas le systeme

des sentences indéterminées (sauf pour les délinquants 4gés de moins

de onze ans, les aliénés et les intoxiqués), que I’octroi de la libération

conditionnelle soit également exclu dans de nombreux cas et n’inter-

vienne de toute fagon que tardivement, et que cette libération ne s’ac-

compagne jamais d’une assistance post-pénale.

C’est une mesure a durée relativement indéterminée que nous

décrit M. Triantaphyllidis en ce qui concerne la réclusion édictée par

la loi hellénique pour les délinquants d’habitude. La loi prévoit a la

fois un minimum et un maximum. Le minimum seul est fixé par le

tribunal; il ne peut pas étre inférieur aux deux tiers de la peine la

plus élevée 1également encourue pour la derniere infraction. Une

premiére fois a lexpiration de ce délai minimum, et ensuite de

nouveau tous les trois ans, le tribunal correctionnel du lieu de

détention est saisi de la question de savoir s’il y a lieu de placer le

délinquant en liberté conditionnelle. La loi dispose d’autre part qu’en

aucun cas la mesure ne peut dépasser de plus de quinze (ou vingt)

ans le minimum fixé par le tribunal. Des dispositions en tous points

analogues sont prévues pour l’internement des délinquants anor-

maux.

Le caractere indéfini de la mesure est encore plus marqué dans la

loi norvégienne d’aprés laquelle le récidiviste dangereux doit demeu-

rer en preventive detention aussi longtemps qu’il est nécessaire. Mais

M. Andenaes nous apprend que le tribunal fixe un terme, générale-

ment de cinq ans, au dela duquel la détention ne pourra pas se pro-

longer sans I’assentiment de ’autorité judiciaire. Dans le cas ou, a

’approche de ce terme, ’administration pénitentiaire estime qu’il ne

1 C’est pour des raisons de cette nature que, lors de sa deuxiéme session tenue

a Genéve en 1954, le Groupe régional consultatif européen des Nations Unies dans

le domaine de la prévention du crime et du traitement des délinquants a envisagé,

de prévoir:

d’une part, une libération conditionnelle sélective pour laquelle on choisirait

le moment le plus opportun, compte tenu du pronostic de reclassement;

d’autre part, une libération conditionnelle automatique intervenant de plein

droit avant la fin de la mesure pour ceux qui n’auraient pas été jugés aptes

A bénéficier de la libération sélective. (Rapport sur la deuxiéme session — Pub-

lications des Nations Unies — Document ST/SOA/SD/EUR/4. Decembre

1954. Imprimerie administrative de Melun, 1955, pp. 9, 11, 39, et 40. Au

surplus, aprés avoir pris connaissance de I’étude déja citée a la note 3, page 181

de M. Marc Ancel, sur la sentence indéterminée, le Groupe n’a pas manqueé

d’observer le rapprochement qu’il est possible de faire entre la libération

conditionnelle sélective et la sentence relativement indéterminée (méme

référence, pp. 20 et 21).

»

191

convient pas de rendre le prisonnier a la vie libre, I’affaire est soumise

au tribunal qui décide si la détention doit étre prolongée ou non, et le

jeu renouvelé de ces progogations judiciaires peut aboutir 3 une

détention a vie. Les régles sont les mémes pour les mesures de sécurité

concernant les délinquants anormaux, avec cette particularité que

’administration pénitentiaire a la faculté d’y mettre fin lorsqu’elle

I’estime utile

En France, la loi ne fixe pas de maximum pour la durée de la reléga-

tion des récidivistes lesquels, par ailleurs, peuvent étre libérés condi-

tionnellement par décision ministérielle aprés un délai de trois ans

Quant 2 la détention de défense sociale envisagée pour les anormaux

mentaux, le projet déja signalé prévoit la fixation par le juge d’un

maximum qui ne devrait pas dépasser dix ans, avec cependant la

possibilité de prorogations judiciaires successives, mais aussi d’une

libération conditionnelle ou définitive accordée aprés six mois par

une autorité judiciaire

En Belgique, les délinquants d’habitude sont mis “a la disposition

du gouvernement” pour une durée dont le juge détermine unique-

ment le maximum, dans les limites de la loi. Ce maximum est obliga-

toirement de vingt ans s’il y a eu récidive de crime sur crime et peut

varier entre cinq et dix ans dans les autres cas. Aprés un délai de trois

ou de cinq ans, les intéressés peuvent €tre relevés judiciairement de

cette mesure, a laquelle, de son c6té, le gouvernement peut mettre fin

théoriquement sans délai, par une libération a ’essai. On sait d’autre

part que 'internement des anormaux en Belgique, dont la durée est

selon les cas de cinq, dix ou quinze ans, peut prendre fin & tout

moment, a titre définitif ou a I’essai, en vertu d’une décision qui

appartient 3 la commission de I’annexe psychiatrique, mais qu’en

revanche lorsqu’un anormal n’est pas libéré au moment ou expire le

terme de son internement, la loi prévoit une possibilité de proroga-

tion judiciaire.?

Pour I’Angleterre enfin nous lisons dans le rapport de M. Duncan

Fairn:

que la loi a établi, en ce qui concerne le corrective training, un

minimum de deux ans et un maximum de quatre ans, et en ce qui

concerne la preventive detention, un minimum de cinq ans et un

maximum de quatorze ans;

que les tribunaux en déterminent eux-mémes la durée exacte dans

la sentence pour chaque cas;

1 Paul Corml “L’expénence belge de défense sociale”, dans Deuxtéme cours

international de criminologie, op. cit.,

pp. 539-57.

192

qu’une libération conditionnelle sélective peut étre accordée par

I’administration lorsque les deux tiers de la mesure ont été

subis;

et qu’en matiere de preventive detention, la libération condition-

nelle devient automatique dés lors que les 5/6° de la durée fixée

par le tribunal sont expirés.

26. Les rapports de MM. Taylor et Duncan Fairn nous appren-

nent que la moitié environ des cinq mille condamnés au corrective

training ont commis leur premier délit alors qu’ils étaient encore

mineurs.

En Afrique du Sud, 459 des cinq cent cinquante récidivistes

européens étudiés par M. Venter ont commencé leur carriére crimi-

nelle 4 seize et dix-sept ans.

En Turquie, sur 868 récidivistes dont le cas a été examiné par

I'Institut de criminolgie d’Ankara, 409, avaient commis leur premiére

infraction avant ’age de 18 ans.

M. Cannat indique que sur les 432 relégués observés au centre

de classification de Loos, 339, étaient passés devant les tribunaux

pour enfants.

M. Di Tullio demande un plus ample développement des centres

chargés du traitement des mineurs anormaux psychiques qui sont

plus particuliérement exposés au récidivisme. MM. Tappan et

Kunter relevent eux aussi I'importance au point de vue récidivisme

du probléme de la délinquance juvénile et des jeunes adultes.

27. Le probléme des courtes peines (inférieures 3 un an d’em-

prisonnement) est abordé par MM. Kunter, Venter et Van Helmont.

Ce dernier, devant I'impossibilité d’organiser un traitement péniten-

tiaire, suggére de faire appel au concours des organisations sociales

d’aide post-pénitentiaire.

28. L’opinion selon laquelle le but et les méthodes de traite-

ment pénitentiaire du récidivisme ne différent pas essentiellement du

but et des méthodes de traitement de la délinquance en général est

exprimée par M. Tappan, dont tout le rapport reflete I'idée que

I'issue du combat contre le récidivisme dépend de ’efficacité du

systeme pénitentiaire organisé pour I’ensemble des délinquants. M.

Kunter et les rapporteurs cubains sont du méme avis.

M. Pertow ne croit pas a cette efficacité; il voit dans I’empri-

sonnement lui-méme I’une des causes principales du récidivisme et ne

’admet que dans les cas extrémes. Sans aller aussi loin, M. Venter

suggeére de ne recourir au traitement en institution que lorsque les

autres méthodes de traitement ont échoué.

M. Tappan considére que le cas des délinquants occasionnels reléve

193

CC—N

de 1a probation (que M. Kunter voudrait voir introduire en Turquie),

de ’amende et des institutions ouvertes. 11 déplore qu’un nombre

€levé d’entre eux soient incarcérés dans les trés grands établissements

a sécurité maxima ou beaucoup sont corrompus au contact de réci-

divistes endurcis. 11 montre la difficulté d’instituer des programmes de

traitement suffisamment individualisés dans ces établissements trop

importants auxquels il oppose I’heureuse innovation des camps et

des petites institutions spécialisées (également préconisées par les

rapporteurs cubains), et d’'une fagon générale, il regrette que des

considérations d’ordre politique et financier viennent freiner I’exten-

sion des méthodes pénitentiaires modernes. A ce sujet, il insiste

notamment sur I'importance de la classification! des délinquants en

vue de leur traitement, sur I'intérét des centres d’examen dans lesquels

est opérée cette classification, et sur la nécessité de disposer de la

variété d’établissements & régimes différenciés dont le besoin apparait

a la lumiere de ’observation scientifique des condamnés.

M. Van Helmont nous rappelle ’attention que 1’administration

pénitentiaire belge porte & I’observation criminologique et & la classi-

fication des délinquants d’habitude pour lesquels son pays dispose

aujourd’hui de tout un éventail d’institutions spécialisées dans le

traitement des asociaux, des antisociaux, et des jeunes récidivistes.

A propos de la différenciation analogue qui existe en France?

pour les relégués, M. Vienne fait observer que la véritable “personna-

lisation” de la mesure exige davantage que la spécialisation des éta-

blissements par types de délinquants, et que le principe d’individua-

lisation doit inspirer toute la conduite de ceux qui sont appelés a par-

ticiper au traitement du délinquant d’habitude. Il rejoint sur ce point

les réflexions de M. Tappan sur le shibboleth de I’ ““individualisation

du traitement”, mot de passe dont il est fait un plus grand usage que

de la chose elle-méme.

Au sujet de I’Angleterre ou la classification des délinquants est

trés poussée,® M. Taylor nous renseigne sur le centre d’orientation

1 Sur la notion moderne de classification envisagée comme méthode de traite-

ment et qu’il ne faut pas confondre avec la simple sériation des délinquants, ainsi

que sur le rapprochement entre la conception américaine et la conception

européenne de la classification, voir Les méthodes modernes de traitement péni-

tentiaire, op. cit., pp. 46-52.

Voir également Thorsten Sellin, ‘“La classification aux Etats-Unis’’ dans

Premier cours international de criminologie, op. cit., pp. 545-58.

2 Charles Germain, “La classification des délinquants en France” (méme

référence qu’a la note précédente, pp. 559-87) et Le traitement des récidivistes

en France (Imprimerie administrative de Melun, 1953).

3 Sir Lionel Fox, ‘““Classification des délinquants dans le Royaume Uni”

Premier cours international de criminologie, op. cit., pp. 588-99.

, d.ans

194

de Wandsworth ou les condamnés au corrective training sont soumis

a une observation de quatre a six semaines en vue de leur répartition

dans quatre types d’établissements décrits par M. Duncan Fairn. Une

classification nuancée est également pratiqueé en ce qui concerne les

condamnés a la preventive detention, en fonction de leur accession aux

différentes phases d’un régime progressif.

En Grece, les délinquants d’habitude sont affectés a une section

spéciale de la prison agricole d’Aguia, dans I'ile de Crete.

Enfin, la Norvége, qui pendant trés longtemps incarcérait ses

récidivistes dangereux dans les mémes établissements que les con-

damnés ordinaires, a décidé récemment de les admettre dans I'insti-

tution créée en 1951 pour les délinquants anormaux mentaux.

29. Pour M. Di Tullio, les méthodes pédagogiques habituelles

sont insuffisantes en ce qui concerne le traitement du récidivisme; il

est selon lui indispensable de les combiner avec des méthodes médico-

psychologiques. M. Tappan reconnait I'intérét de ces derniéres

méthodes pour le traitement intensif d’un nombre limité de récidi-

vistes. Il montre comment 1a group-therapy que les prisons améri-

caines utilisent sous différentes formes, peut aller dans certains cas

jusqu’a un traitement psychiatrique véritable.! Mais pour le surplus,

il lui apparait que le comportement du délinquant est davantage

affecté par d’autres éléments du traitement tels que I’éducation

générale, I'instruction religieuse et la formation morale, la direction

des activités culturelles et des loisirs, 'accent étant mis sur I’organisa-

tion rationnelle du travail pénitentiaire et la formation profession-

nelle des détenus. Encore souligne-t-il le caractére conjectural d’un

traitement appliqué dans le milieu artificiel des prisons et dont la

valeur réformatrice n’est pas connue par des résultats tangibles sus-

ceptibles d’étre portés a I’actif de chacun des éléments de ce traite-

ment. Et le professeur américain réclame une intensification de la

recherche de techniques efficaces.2

30. Une analyse trés poussée de la psychologie des délinquants

d’habitude permet 4 M. Vienne de montrer comment, par I'uni-

formité du régime et I'impersonnalité du traitement qui la caractéri-

sent, la peine classique “aggrave les causes de dyssocialité antérieures

et renforce ainsi l1a constitution de ’habitude criminelle.”’

Alors que M. Pertow se résigne a la ségrégation a vie des délin-

quants incorrigibles et que MM. Chavez Milanes et Lancis y Sanchez

1 Des indications trés détaillées sont fournies par le Dr. Mackwood sur la

psychothérapie de groupe pratiquée a la prison anglaise de Wormwood Scrubs.

? C’est la conclusion a laquelle arrive également le président de la Fondation

internationale pénale et pénitentiaire dans sa préface a ’étude déja citée sur les

méthodes modernes de traitement.

195

considerent la récidive comme une maladie mentale qui en s’enraci-

nant se montre rebelle & tout traitement, les rapporteurs anglais et

belge soulignent le but rééducatif du traitement méme des récidivistes

les plus marqués. M. Tappan de son c6té s’étend sur la nécessité d’un

traitement orienté vers le retour du délinquant dans la vie libre et tout

d’abord vers la liberté conditionnelle; il fait observer I’intérét a cet

égard de la collaboration de plus en plus étroite qui devrait s’établir

des le début de ’emprisonnement entre ’administration pénitentiaire

et la communauté du dehors dont les divers organismes tant publics

que privés devraient demeurer a la disposition des prisonniers.!

31. M. Duncan Fairn décrit une expérience de semi-liberté qui

fonctionne depuis 1953 a Bristol pour les condamnés a la preventive

detention ayant accédé a la troisitme phase du régime progressif

et signale qu’il s’est formé une association de voisins qui accueillent

ces récidivistes chez eux pour la fin de la semaine. Un systéme iden-

tique est organisé 4 Durham pour les femmes condamnées 4 la méme

mesure.

M. Cannat insiste lui aussi sur la valeur exceptionnelle de la

semi-liberté comme étape de transition pour les délinquants d’habi-

tude appelés a bénéficier de la libération conditionnelle.

32. L’importance cruciale du traitement post-pénal pendant la

période de liberté conditionnelle est mise en lumiére par plusieurs

rapporteurs. M. Tappan note que dans le systéme fédéral 80%,, et a

New York 509%, des rechutes sont constatées au cours de la premiére

année suivant la sortie de prison.

Le Dr. Mackwood considere que pour ceux dont la délinquance

était due a un facteur psychique, le délai de consolidation est d’au

moins trois ans 3 partir du retour a la vie libre.

M. Cannat, qui s’est livré a ’analyse de 20 cas heureux de reclas-

sement au centre de relégués de Loos, estime que la plupart de ces

sujets seraient retombés sans I’aide vigilante du comité d’assistance

post-pénale. Relevant le role a ses yeux capital joué dans la formation

de I’habitude criminelle par I'instabilité dont les récidivistes en cause

ont fait preuve tout au long de leur existence, le rapporteur frangais

estime au surplus qu’en I’état de nos connaissances dans les autres

domaines, le moyen le plus efficace d’éviter la récidive consiste & com-

1] e traitement des détenus ne doit pas mettre I’accent sur I’exclusion de

ceux-ci de la société, mais au contraire sur le fait qu’ils continuent a en faire

partie. A cette fin, il faut recourir, dans la mesure du possible, a la collaboration

d’organismes de la communauté pour aider le personnel de I’établissement dans

sa tache de reclassement des détenus’ (article 11 de I’Ensemble de régles minima

pour le traitement des détenus adopté en 1952 par le Groupe régional consultatif

européen des Nations Unies).

196

battre cette instabilité par la fixation des intéressés, notamment grace

A un emploi stable, a I'influence bienfaisante d’une compagne, etc.

En Angleterre, les libérés conditionnels sont confiés aux soins du

Central After-Care Association. La Belgique a des organismes de

tutelle qui possédent des homes d’accueil pour les libérés n’ayant

plus de foyer ni de parents disposés a les recevoir.

En Grece, le libéré conditionnel est soumis & une surveillance qui

peut étre confiée a une société de patronage.

Pour la Turquie, M. Kunter fait remarquer que I’absence d’un

systéme d’assistance aux prisonniers et aux libérés, méme mineurs,

rend le reclassement extrémement difficile. Les rapporteurs cubains

demandent une législation sociale garantissant le travail aux libérés.

33. Le probléme de la réhabilitation n’est évoqué que par les

rapporteurs belge et grec. En Belgique, la réhabilitation peut €tre

accordée aux délinquants d’habitude aprés un délai de dix ans a

compter de la fin de 1a mesure. Le délai est de cinq ans en Gréce.

C. CONCLUSION

34. La lutte contre le récidivisme pose un probléme que l’on

retrouve au stade du traitement comme au stade de la prévention:

c’est celui des causes profondes du crime et de la tendance criminelle.

La prévention comme la guérison d’un mal exigent la connaissance

exacte de ’origine de ce mal. Des études! ont été entreprises au cours

des derniéres années pour essayer de déméler chez le délinquant la

trame des facteurs biologiques, psychologiques et sociaux qui ont pu

le conduire a la criminalité et pour dégager si possible les lois qui

régissent le comportement antisocial. Mais on s’est apergu que, envi-

sagés chacun isolément, les différents facteurs réputés criminogeénes

se retrouvaient couramment chez des sujets non délinquants, qu’il

n’existait pas de formule pour exprimer avec méme un semblant de

rigueur scientifique la combinaison d’éléments qui provoque la

réaction criminelle, et que, pour en arriver a l’acte, il avait souvent

fallu un élément catalyseur qui différait d’un cas a lautre.

! Les plus importantes sont celles du professeur Heuyer (Enquéte sur la délin-

quance juvénile. Etude de 400 dossiers. Pour I’enfance coupable, 1942) de Sheldon

et Eleanor Glueck (plus particulirement Unraveling juvenile delinquency,

Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1950) et de Erwin Frey (Der friihkriminelle Riick-

Sfallsverbrecher. Bale, 1951).

On doit citer également Venter, Recidivism (Pretoria, 1954), ouvrage sur la

base duquel a été établi le rapport national sud-africain au Congrés, ainsi que

P’Enquéte criminologique concernant 1.000 délinquants récidivistes publiée en 1954

par I'Institut de criminologie de I’Université d’Ankara.

197

La complexité de cette situation n’est pas faite pour faciliter la

solution, qu’il s’agisse de la prévention ou du traitement.

35. Cependant, et sans préjudice des conclusions auxquelles

arrivera le Congrés a la suite des travaux de la troisiéme et de la

quatrieme section sur les causes et le pronostic du récidivisme, on

doit tenir pour constant que I’'une de ces causes réside dans le manque

d’efficacité des moyens utilisés pour supprimer la tendance délictuelle

des le début de la carriere criminelle ou pour éviter qu’elle ne prenne

naissance a ’occasion de I’exécution des premiéres sanctions pro-

nonceées.

36. Cette observation s’applique en premier lieu aux procédés

employés pour combattre la délinquance juvénile. Dans un ordre

d’idées voisin, on doit déplorer la coupure radicale qui existe dans la

plupart des pays entre le régime des mineurs et celui des adultes, alors

que la continuité dans le processus criminel qui pour un méme sujet

conduit de la délinquance juvénile & la délinquance d’habitude exige

a I’évidence une continuité dans le régime des mesures qui lui sont

appliquées.!

37. Le sursis et la probation, ou tout au moins ’'usage qui est fait

de ces deux institutions pourtant excellentes dans leur principe, ne

sont pas non plus & I’abri de la critique.

38. Mais c’est essentiellement sur l’organisation de la peine

privative de liberté que doivent porter les efforts afin d’empécher que

cette peine et ses modalités d’exécution ne fassent éclore ou ne vien-

nent amplifier le penchant criminel chez le prisonnier. Pour cette

raison, on devrait d’abord s’abstenir autant que possible de recourir

a la prison lorsqu’il est avéré que d’autres mesures sont plus appro-

priées. On devrait surtout limiter ’emploi des courtes peines d’em-

prisonement tant que ’on n’aura pas réussi 4 atténuer les graves

inconvénients 4 ce genre de sanctions. Quant aux peines de longue

durée, il faudrai les organiser de manieére:

d’une part, supprimer dans le régime pénitentiaire, non seule-

ment les rigueurs inutiles qui peuvent amener ou aggraver chez

le prisonnier un sentiment d’hostilité envers I’autorité et la

société, mais aussi les facteurs de déséquilibre ou de désadapta-

tion sociale qui sont susceptibles de compromettre le futur

reclassement;

d’autre part, & donner au délinquant le traitement rééducatif que

requiert son cas individuel et qui doit tendre 4 sa réadaptation

progressive a la société.

1 Ce point est mis en lumiére par Erwin Frey dans Reform des Massnahmen-

rechts gegen Friihkriminelle (Bale, 1951), pp. 8-10, 20-22, 72-77.

198

Enfin, il est indispensable d’assurer au prisonnier libéré I’assis-

tance post-pénale sans laquelle il est exposé a la récidive et de prévoir

sa réintégration par étapes dans les droits civils et publics dont il a

pu étre privé comme conséquence de sa condamnation.

39. Applicables a la grande masse des délinquants chez lesquels

la tendance criminelle n’est pas encore affirmée, ces régles (sauf en

principe I’emploi du sursis et de la probation) sont également valables

pour ceux qui sont sur le chemin du récidivisme ou qui sont déja

installés dans la délinquance d’habitude.

Dans leurs grandes lignes, les méthodes de traitement demeurent

les mémes parce que, en réalité, le probléme du récidivisme ne fait

qu’un avec celui de la délinquance en général, si ’'on veut bien faire

abstraction de la délinquance purement occasionnelle qui a vrai dire

ne nécessite pas un traitement véritable,! le délit ayant été un acci-

dent qui n’aura pas de suites.

40. Le traitement pénitentiaire du récidivisme doit avoir un

caractere rééducatif prononcé. Sans doute existe-t-il des hypothéses

dans lesquelles s’estompera le but rééducatif de la mesure, par exemple

dans le cas d’un malfaiteur professionnel dont le caracteére irré-

ductible ne permet d’envisager pour I'instant qu’une ségrégation de

longue durée, sans I’établissement d’un programme positif de traite-

ment auquel le sujet soit disposé A apporter son concours. Mais il ne

faut pas perdre de vue qu’en régle générale, le besoin de ce traite-

ment finira par apparaitre 4 échéance plus ou moins éloignée, et

avec une acuité alors accrue. Cette situation justifie pleinement

I’application d’'une mesure de durée relativement indéterminée dont

le principe sera décidé par ’autorité judiciaire aprés une observation

criminologique approfondie qui se prolongera au cours de I’exécution

de la mesure. Celle-ci doit s’appliquer a I’exclusion de toute autre

sanction; il est souhaitable qu’elle soit adaptée a situation du sujet,

au stade législatif d’abord (gamme de mesures distinctes, par exemple

pour les récidivistes dangereux et les anormaux dangereux, mesures

particulieres pour les vagabonds et mendiants, pour les alcooliques,

etc.), au stade pénitentiaire ensuite (classification selon les différents

types de délinquants, et individualisation véritable du traitement).

La mesure ne prendra fin quaprés avoir été précédée d’une

libération A titre d’essai destinée 4 éprouver le degré d’amendement et

de réadaptation sociale du sujet au moyen de conditions personnelles

que le délinquant s’engagera a respecter et qu’il sera d’autre part aidé

a remplir grice A une assistance post-pénale active. Il est souhaitable

! Le professeur de Greeff consideére que, parmi les délinquants qui entrent en

prison pour la premiére fois, il y en a environ 309, qui ne recommenceraient pas,

méme si I’on exergait sur eux aucune action rééducative,

199

“que la cessation de la mesure soit du ressort de I’autorité judiciaire

avec l’avis d’experts ou d’une commission légalement constituée,

composée d’experts et 4 laquelle appartient un juge” (Résolution du

Congrés de La Haye).

41. Pour le succés du traitement, il est essentiel d’amener le

délinquant 3 I’accepter et & y collaborer lui-méme de bon gré. Des

soins psychiatriques! pourront s’avérer trés utiles pour la création

de I’état d’esprit nécessaire a cet effet.

42. La question de savoir si des formes particuliéres de délin-

quance ou de récidivisme autorisent le recours d certaines autres

techniques d’ordre médical ou chirurgical destinées & provoquer la

transformation physiologique ou psychologique du sujet, doit étre

examinée avec le souci de ne pas porter atteinte 3 la dignité humaine

et de ne pas négliger pourtant les espoirs thérapeutiques que ’on

peut fonder sur ces méthodes.

1 Dr. Bachet, “Vers une psychiatrie pénitentiaire’, dans Cinquéme cours inter-

national de criminologie (Rome, 1955).

200

SECTION V

TREATMENT OF RECIDIVISM

by Georg K. Sturup

In this report the more technical aspects of treatment of recidivism

will be discussed. It ought to have been a monograph. Cut down to

4000 words the presentation of this vast and controversial field has

been rather kaleidoscopic and many things have to be added during

our coming discussions.

1. WHAT IS TREATMENT?

Correction as general deterrence of crime and disablement of the

wrongdoer is outside the scope of this section. Our subject is that

form of protection for the public from dangerous and not-dangerous

recidivating offenders that can be achieved through individual pre-

vention and through rehabilitative efforts.

Treatment of prisoners is the professional accomplishment of these

efforts.

“The concept of correctional ‘treatment’ of the offender is sur-

prisingly equivocal, considering the common employment of the

term,” says Tappan. This statement is important and I must continue

to quote from his report. “In some quarters treatment is considered

in a quite narrow sense as the therapeutic ministrations of psychia-

trists, psychologists and case work counsellors, designed to relieve

emotional problems.” Such therapy may be employed for the inten-

sive treatment of a limited part of the recidivist group. After an

experimental period Mackwood has since 1946 used such treatment

on selected prisoners in a 10-bed ward in Wormwood Scrubs and has

obtained valuable results. Without depreciating the role of such

expensive work ‘it is clear nonetheless that numerous other aspects

of experience and training in the institutional setting have heavier

impact upon the attitudes and conduct of most prisoners. Moreover,

it appears that for a majority of offenders these broader aspects of

treatment are both more apposite to their needs and more economi-

201

cally feasible than highly specialised

individualised therapy

(Tappan). These inmate activities, e.g. dramatic and musical activities

library, inmate counsel and special interest groups as well as

privileges, e.g. the radio system, inmate visiting and mail privileges

and so on are necessary elements in a treatment system, but it is not

difficult to use all these things in a way that does not fit our idea

of treatment. Tappan’s attempt at a differentiation between the

specialised, individualised treatment on the one side and the more

generally used broader aspects of treatment seems to me to be un-

fortunate.

Only measures adopted with a special purpose, based on an

analysis of existing situations and needs and a synthesis of the

evaluations of these can be allowed the name of professional treat-

ment

This professional treatment is of a more or less specialised charac-

ter with stronger emphasis in some cases on psychological structure

in other cases on the more directly educational procedure. In all

cases an emotional contact with at first one and later several other

persons is of basic importance in order to normalise the recidivist’s

group membership and in order to give him a true picture of his

status in relation to the norms of society. For the treatment, pre-

liminary evaluation of the total situation is needed, and this evalua-

tion ought to result in something like the medical concept of a

diagnosis. Such a diagnosis cannot and should not be final, neither

can it be complete in a single word. The social and personal back-

ground and the crimes committed have to be synthesised, and as

long as we know as little as we do, we must admit that often it will

be a more or less intuitive analysis and synthesis. Neither the social

nor the personal factors are stable elements. This means that we

need to be very elastic and not once but over and over again must

attempt to place the criminal in situations affording possibilities for

better adjustment and giving better opportunities for avoidance of

later maladjustments.

The measures adopted on the basis of psychiatric, psychological or

social special knowledge will often, perhaps in the majority of all

cases, be carried out through acts and with explanations and com-

ments from a series of persons. The professionals themselves, as well

as members of the security staff, workshop personnel and all the other

persons living in the institution, take part in the course of events

some without ability to have a full view of the consequences of what

they say and do, some with an intention of destroying the rehabilita-

tive results which may eventually develop, just in order to satisfy their

own aggressions. ‘“‘Planned treatment” in a closed institution must

202

always be planned in accordance with these facts, and the results of

any single measure cannot be predicted in detail.!

Vencesectio was an important medical treatment for its time when

used in order to cure the diseased, but through untiring clinical

efforts, the indications for veneesectio have been more and more

restricted and the modern medical man has been able to devise other

methods giving better results. It is time for treatment in our field like-

wise to get an individualised stamp. The cheaper and broader

aspects of treatment, especially mentioned by Tappan, are a neces-

sary prerequisite for modern treatment and a sine qua non for the

development of a therapeutic climate in the institution. When they

are used in a specialised way they may evolve into a definite pro-

fessional treatment.

Before leaving this field it must be mentioned that many of the ill

consequences of personal conflicts, including aggressiveness, vanish

in due time. In the end all things will mend. In some circumstances

these conflicts may be kept alive, in other circumstances they may

increase the untoward symptoms. A therapeutic climate may in itself

act as a general strengthening of personal resources and thus be an

important aid in the healing power of nature.

In this new field it is still important to remember the old Hippo-

cratic medical rules for treatment, where the doctor is seen as the

helmsman following the course shaped by nature. He is cautious and

expectant but at the same time active in his attempts to support

nature. It is not enough to be ready to do the things yourself, but also

to arrange it so that the patient, his environment and the circum-

stances assist. (From aphorism 412.)

II. RECIDIVISM FROM THE POINT OF

VIEW OF TREATMENT

Repeated sentencing because of criminal acts, apart from occa-

sional crimes, can be traced to several conditjons.

1 In Denmark such combined treatment has been worked out since 1925 in the

institutions for criminal psychopaths placed since 1935 in Herstedvester (since

1951 with a sister-institution in Horsens). The inmates are a group of recidivists

deemed a menace to society; i.e. the habitual criminal with a more serious

criminal career or prospective career and some definite personality deviation.

During these years and until 1st Jan. 1954, 1,066 males have been, or are still,

in the institution. 949 times a parole has been attempted, 343 times a return

to the institution has been effected. On parole are 355, finally discharged 239,

died in institution 19, died during parole 26, transferred to hospitals 53. In the

institutions are 374.

In special prisons for young recidivists more pedagogical lines have been

followed and the same is tried for ordinary prisons.

203

A. Some recidivists have a greater than average tendency to

conflicts with their surroundings. These recidivists have personality

problems.

B. Others are placed in surroundings promoting the possibilities

for conflicts of such a kind that they are apt to result in some sort of

counteraction deemed as crime. These recidivists have social prob-

lems.

It is perhaps more common, that the A-group of factors as well

as the B-group are effective at the same time, and that both sets of

factors are more or less interdependent; but it is appropriate to con-

sider each one isolated from the other. Before considering the actual

professional treatment it is further necessary to stress that the criminal

at first must be detected and sentenced. Some of the criminal conse-

quences of conflicts are more easily detected than others. (Embezzle-

ment is easy to detect, exhibitionism is seldom detected.) An earlier

conviction for a given crime may mean a greater probability of detec-

tion and sentencing if a new crime of the same sort is committed.

Ignorance of the law is seldom of any importance when it is a ques-

tion of recidivism, but may be found in cases of imbecility or

psychosis.

A. PERSONALITY PROBLEMS

For mental deficients, punishment is an irrational procedure and

should never be considered. It is a task for the social authorities to

assist and take care of fellow citizens when intellectual defects are of

such a kind that the person cannot manage his own life in ordinary

society.

When the question is one of schizophrenic or symptomatic psy-

choses, affective disorders of a manic-depressive character and, lastly,

of senile psychoses, the same is true. It should be irrelevant for the

form of treatment of such patients if their disease is recognised in

relation to a criminal deed or sufficiently early for preventive treat-

ment.

When we arrive at the group psychiatrically known as the ““organic

reactions”, we find more controversial opinions between persons with

a difference in professional background. It should be possible for all

to agree that an organic psychosis of traumatic, encephalitic, or toxic

origin, or due to a cerebral neoplasm, should be considered in the

same way as the other psychoses already mentioned. Disagreement

grows if we go further and try to include all ‘“‘organic reactions”.

Some medical experts suppose that many cases of personality devia-

tions with such symptoms as irritability, explosivity, and inadequacy

204

are due to traumatic, encephalitic or toxic states of a character diffi-

cult to diagnose.

This view seems to spread, and seen from this angle, it means

that rather many of the group ““psychopathic personality and neurotic

reactions” could be more or less organic reaction types. The symptoms

are in these cases, of course, far from “insanity’’, and the treatment

needed i1s 1n most cases different from the treatment used in

ordinary mental hospitals, but not less complex. It is the following

groups which are of the greatest importance for the question under

discussion here:

Psychopaths! with immature personalities are also common, as are

neurotics, epileptics and addicts. The relationship of these groups to

the ““organic reactions” cannot be discussed here.

The “‘borderline cases” who are not mental deficients, also called

the “dull”, have not the importance suggested in earlier criminology.

Many of the supposedly ‘“‘dull” are educationally backward child-

ren in whom the later development has been hampered because of

emotional problems, or serious special defects of reading ability and

other such difficulties. These special defects can in many cases be

treated with excellent results, which also give possibilities for further

adjustment to normal society. Many of the ‘“dull”’ persons are

difficult to place in modern urbanised society, and when they get

into trouble they may be more easily detected and may have greater

difficulties in evading sentence. The therapeutic problem is mostly a

problem of the co-ordination of the level of personal aspiration with

that of a suitable social placement.

B. ENVIRONMENTAL MALADJUSTMENTS

The subjective assessment of the environment is important, and

this has a certain, but not fixed, relation to the environment as it may

be described by other observers. In the development of clinical crim-

inology, this is a great difficulty. The facts collected by the socio-

logists are important, but in spite of the vast amount of such know-

ledge, in handling individuals it is not easy to know the actual impor-

tance of living in a special part of the town, etc. For the clinician,

social function gets its importance as a single link in the chain of

social transactions in which the person is a partner. We need to know

! As so many different groups are included under this heading, it would for

our purpose be preferable to include in the group all the cases with deviations

of character sufficiently severe to play a serious part in social maladjustment.

now

In Denmark we often use the term “Insufficiency of character” for this group

205

not the potential developments, but that part of them which may be

actual. Our actual behaviour is influenced—we may say conditioned

—Dby the actual situation but also from what we expect of a given

situation. It is a fact that a man is rewarded and punished by the

sort of reputation he has, and especially by the reputation he thinks

he has. This means that serving a sentence—forcing upon the man

“bad reputation”’—can mean a greater risk of new crimes as well as

greater risk of detection. We may add that the psychology of learning

reveals that punishment is no effective remedy for

unlearning

a type of behaviour. On the other hand, we see the opposite effect

of the reputation, as it is experienced by the criminal himself, when

after some years it is proved to him that it was possible to come

through several of the difficulties that in earlier life were followed by

criminal reactions. After such a period, he feels relieved of a very

heavy burden, and it is much easier for him to continue life as a

normal citizen.

The following may serve as an example:

An approximately 60-year-old chronic criminal (several times rape,

housebreaking, theft), many times and many years imprisoned, was

after castration able to manage a reasonably satisfactory life in the

countryside where he, during four years of parole, had worked as a

farmhand. The family he lived with assisted him in every way,

accepted him in spite of his fairly common minor hysterical reactions

Shortly after parole was finished, his family in Copenhagen suggested

it was more fun to live in town and he felt he should be ‘“‘as good as

anyone else” and went back to the city. After a few weeks he used

more money than he earned and committed new thefts. He was

again found not fit for punishment and placed by the court under

supervision by the institution for psychologically abnormal criminals

and placed in his former situation as farmhand, working for the

family he knew. Everything went smoothly again and he has since

been satisfied to know that he was welcome back and could do a good

day’s work.

III. DIAGNOSIS

In clinical criminology, a diagnostic system is needed which does

not only take the biological personality into consideration. The

diagnosis we need should instruct the professional collaborator as to

the direction of his probable tasks in the handling of the criminal. The

diagnosis should be a direction for action. Character insufficiency of

an inadequate type does not indicate to the criminologist a course to

counteract the probability of recidivism. It is difficult to say what

206

should be included besides the wants, desires and urges of the per-

sonality. We want to know what part of these things that are going

to be of importance for behaviour, can be expected in a given en-

vironment. Can he be supposed to have an urge to get in contact with

former prison-friends? Will he react with a subjective expectation of

success or failure? Will his reputation place a strain upon him? And

so on. Some of the important elements to be included in the clinical

criminological diagnosis are: Intellectual endowment, character

(personality), training and social background, support needed and

obtainable, physical development, reputation and reaction to the

reputation, probable environment. These and probably several other

elements have to be taken into consideration for the planning of a

treatment.

The scientific studies of value for this planning are few. Studies over

many years of individual offenders in institutions and at large are

scarce and difficult to obtain. Cross sections of criminological prob-

lems are much easier to obtain, but are of little value for our work

and may have too discouraging an effect on it.

IV. WHO SHOULD BE TREATED AND WHO

SHOULD DO IT?

At the International Congress of Criminologists held in Hamburg

in 1905, von Hamel stressed that the problem of the criminal recidi-

vist is a psychiatric one, and it was unanimously agreed that each

habitual criminal must be treated according to his psychological

peculiarities. This kind of treatment presupposes an accurate know-

ledge and careful examination of the individual treated. Now, after

fifty years, we should be able to agree on this in spite of the fact that

little was accomplished in the years past. All recidivists are in need of

treatment, and a team of professionals is needed for this job.

Many psychiatrists do not think it is a psychiatric problem to

treat the antisocial, unbalanced, alcoholic, chronic criminal, but it is

more and more accepted that the psychiatrist is indispensable in the

treatment team, and also that he cannot do the work alone. Medico-

psychological and social examination is necessary for classification,

but it is not certain that a group of prisoners should be very homo-

geneous. Placement in a group of so-called untreatables, considered as

more or less hopeless, may result in identification with the other

“hopeless” and stimulate the devaluation of the personality and out-

ward aggressiveness. The very young and the older both need treat-

207

ment, but should be kept apart in order that the older should not

infect the younger prisoners. On the other hand, it is often seen that

a few older and more balanced people may have a good influence in

a group of aggressive immature young recidivists.

Solitary confinement gives little possibility for treatment, but may

in periods be of value for an unbalanced man. When used, it demands

a well-trained staff as it should be controlled very intensively in order

to counteract the temptation to indulge in day-dreams. Living

together with the other criminals means a great risk of contamina-

tion. Many a hardened criminal has obtained his professional train-

ing in a great prison. Therefore the group living together should be

of such a size that the officer in charge of the group can have a per-

sonal contact with each one of his inmates, and counteract unsuitable

group-building. If he thinks an undesirable influence too strong, he

should eventually suggest the removal of one of his inmates to

another group. In our experience, a group of more than fifteen is rather

difficult to handle if the officer has to fulfil the demands of the treat-

ment team. In open institutions, with hard work during the whole

day, it is a little easier, and the living-together group may be a little

bigger.

The more seriously maladjusted group needs a more psychia-

trically influenced treatment, and the same staff should be in charge

of the treatment during the period in the institution and during

parole. In many cases, it is of value before parole to let the man start

normal working in a private workshop outside in the community and

return to the institution after working hours, or for apprentices to go

to a special school in the evening. It helps the prisoner to obtain a feel-

ing of security to know that he really is able to manage normal work,

together with free people, and helps to prepare free people to see

that “prisoners are also people”.

In Herstedvester, we have been able during the years to cut down

the period needed for institutional treatment to two or three years,

on the average, but parole is still for more than three; on the average

it lasts about four years.

The less maladjusted group needs a less psychiatric influence in

the treatment team but when a psychiatrist, trained in the problems

that arise during treatment in a closed institution, is available in a

prison it is soon found that he is called upon to assist in many cases

that have before not been looked upon as abnormal. As already men-

tioned, the treatment staff consists of the administrative staff, the

professional group (psychologist, teacher, priest, social staff, etc.),

the workshop leaders and the security staff, but the most important

members of this group are the prisoner and his relatives.

208

In most modern institutions, it is now remembered that nothing

can be accomplished without the prisoner as an active collaborator

in his own future, but the collaboration with the family—the family

treatment—is hardly begun. In an experimental setting with short-

time-serving recidivists in Copenhagen, it was found to be a very

promising method.

V. GENERAL PROBLEMS OF TREATMENT

The initial examination should define the possible therapeutic

situation. Does the new inmate already realise the need for another

solution to his problems? Has he an obvious satisfaction through his

criminal deeds (special sexual needs, special forms of aggression,

etc.)? Will he be willing to accept difficulties during the period of

treatment? What is needed in order to make him accept such diffi-

culties? How can his own collaboration be secured? The ordinary

psychiatric patient often finds it difficult to accept his own need of

treatment. Since, in the case of the prisoner, it is other people who

suffer, not he himself, the need for treatment is for him still more

difficult to accept. The known preconceptions of the institution can

make this easy or difficult. Sometimes the acceptance starts in relation

to an ordinary conflict, when he is out of balance. Any of the

staff may then suddenly find themselves in a situation giving a

possibility for deeper emotional contact, and they must then use this

contact in order to develop an easier acceptance by the prisoner of

his need for assistance. The professionals, performing the initial

examination, have a greater possibility in this direction than any

other employees. All in this group are, like any other prison em-

ployee, connected with proceedings that are usually seen as directed

against the subject. When in spite of this a positive rapport is estab-

lished, and the official is identified as a friendly person, it will help to

give the inmate a matter-of-fact attitude towards authorities. He will

see that some authorities are able to smile, to understand a joke, and

perhaps what 1s most important, able to accept the possibility of

making mistakes themselves.

The process then taking place can in many cases be described as

some sort of ‘‘neurotisation”. Insecurity and sometimes a conscious

anxiety can be found behind the expressed need for help. When a

transference is established, it is important to carry it over to someone

else. At the time of parole, such transference should include the social

worker in charge of the case.

One of the most difficult problems is the loneliness after parole.

209

CcC-0

If the prisoner returns to an environment where he has been frus-

trated before, the risk of new emotional difficulties, and of relapsing

into old habits, is great.

The following is an example:

An alcoholic with a long frustration in relation to the husband

whom she loved. He made her feel secure, he would never let her

down, etc. At the same time, she felt insufficient, oppressed, but also

that this ““was of no importance”. Treatment was very difficult to

accept, but much was achieved. When discharged, she felt free of any

temptations to new debauches. The family was surprised to see that

she was again ‘“‘herself”

b

L]

it was as if she was ten years younger.

In a period together with her husband in another town, nothing

special happened. The day she returned to the home-town, she

bought several bottles on her way to the house. She did not like her

house but had decided herself that it was necessary to continue to live

there. She was unable to explain why the old pattern was re-estab-

lished. When she went away shortly afterwards on a business trip

together with her husband, she did not need to drink. Each time she

was away, she was normal with a satisfactory intellectual contact with

other people, but one not emotional enough for her needs.

Such cases may remind us of the experience obtained from experi-

men tal neuroses in animals. We know too little of what sort of stimu-

lation has given rise to the conflict. In such, but not all other cases,

the alcoholism may be a crutch to the emotionally disabled. Group-

work seems to be very important for the substitution of this crutch by

a more acceptable support. The Alcoholics Anonymous movement

offers such service to the alcoholics, but it is not easy to transfer this

sort of groupwork to other criminal groups. It is also doubtful if

criminal alcoholics should be thrown upon their own group. A con-

tinuation of friendship started in a prison can only be safe when the

criminal ‘“‘profession’ of the two friends is very different. Emotional

loneliness seems to be less troublesome for people living in a more

primitive group. The prevailing spirit of being together in working

hours, as well as in spare-time, gives the needed feeling of ‘““belong-

ing”’. Loneliness also is easier to endure if the other members in the

group are in the same frustrating situation—on board ship, during

expeditions, etc. When the others are suffering the same emotional

lack of outlet the inconveniences of this are much less than in a

situation where one person alone is frustrated. It seems that it is the

“relative emotionality’ that is important for the symptoms develop-

ing, but further studies in this field are greatly needed.

210

VI. MORE SPECIAL PROBLEMS OF TREATMENT

The psychotherapeutic goal is an acceptable adaptation to the given

society. What sort of technical approach should be used is not

discussed here. That is a psychiatric question, but it should perhaps

be mentioned that some rather experienced professional persons,

when assessing prisoners, seem to expect an emotional differentiation

on a higher level than is usually found in the unskilled labourer’s

group, and it is from this group that a great many of the chronic

criminals are recruited. Often it is necessary to be very careful about

the prisoner’s level of aspiration. It must, through the therapeutic

sessions, acquire a strong touch of reality. Other common problems

are that self-knowledge often is very incomplete, and the emotional

balance unsatisfactory.

The educational problems are twofold: bettering the economic capa-

city and providing such sparetime interests that after discharge may

eventually be valuable for better group-contacts.

For the economic capacity, an apprenticeship may in some cases

be of value; in others it will have no importance at all, perhaps being

just a waste of time. One may see a prisoner trained more or less

against his will as a furniture-maker. In spite of being very clever in

his profession, this can be combined in such a way with ‘“being

punished” that he cannot use his trade in free society.

The working hours should be the same as outside the prison and

the workshops as ‘““average” as possible with regard to machinery and

supervision of the work.

A theoretical training based on the work in which the man is

engaged will give good opportunities for elementary training in the

three R’s in a way these people can accept. Many of them hate

ordinary school-work. A great many prisoners with disciplinary

problems have special defects in reading ability. We agree with

Taylor that they are such poor spellers that some of them cannot read

four-letter words effectively. The news or a short elementary letter is

outside their capacity, nor can they write in a way understandable to

other people. With a very specialised pedagogic technique, it is in most

cases (after intensive training—several hours a week—in small groups

of about four) possible to carry them over these difficulties and thus

raise their self-esteem. This opens the field for normal spare-time

interests. When planning these, it is important to remember that

high cultural interests (music, art, literature) may isolate rather

than help, if a man has to work as a bricklayer’s assistant or in an-

other group of unskilled labourers considering such cultural interests

211

as suspicious. In such a case, he must learn not to talk about his

interests

The ordinary medical treatment is connected with only few special

problems. The treatment of narcotics and alcoholics is important

but space does not allow any further discussion here. In prisons

we see rather few psycho-somatic diseases. When seen, they should

be handled in very close collaboration with the non-medical staff. The

hormonal treatment of sexual hyperactivity should just be men-

tioned. Some of the more explosive prisoners may, through periodical

hormonal treatment, be helped to endure forced celibacy. When

carefully controlled, this treatment seems a very safe procedure and

can give such a prisoner sufficient self-reliance to enable him more

easily to accept his special problems

Shock-treatment is seldom needed

Surgical treatment is much more controversial

Cosmetic operations, taking away tattooings, may be necessary. A

death-head on the forehead must be removed before the man returns

to society. In spite of all, a scar here gives fewer troubles.

Lobotomies are sometimes suggested, but, for the recidivists under

consideration here, should be used with caution

In some cases, prolonged psychotherapy and relaxation carried out

in closed institutions can give the man the needed balance. (Sachs.)

Only when such treatment has been attempted in vain is operation

acceptable.

Castration can be used in some countnes The operatlon is severely

attacked by people who have no practical experience of this treat-

ent themselves and who, in cases where castration is indicated

cannot offer any other treatment besides segregation. In spite of these

emotional and unbalanced attacks

its use in the Scandinavian

countries and in Holland is unaltered

It is mentioned in the Norwegian report by Andenaes, and the

same excellent results are seen in Denmark. When care is taken to

use it only in cases where other treatment is not possible, and after

intensive psychiatric preparation, and together with ordinary re-

habilitative efforts, this operation can give the man a fair possibility

of resisting abnormal impulses which, before the operation, he could

not resist. (Stiirup, 1953)

Social treatment. In the French national report, Pierre Cannat

stresses that social instability and real vagrancy seem to be of

special importance in the personality development of many habitual

criminals. An attempt to stabilise such persons and force them to

live in a special district has proved it possible to resocialise a fair

number of such—often older—persons. Many of these have had many

212

years of segregation and had been supposed to be beyond therapeutic

reach. In the French experiment, a systematic social aid from, and a

good contact with, the supervisor has been of importance. The

paroled prisoners had their hands tied as to work, and as to spare

time activities, but were free to obtain contact with women living in

the district. Several of them lived with women of their own age, and

the aid these women could give seems to have been a great advantage.

Social workers have many problems to tackle and their work

will often develop into real case-work. Returning to normal society

presents a lot of new problems of an economic, social and personal

character. Loneliness will sometimes be a heavy burden. It is impor-

tant that the prisoner is prepared to meet such problems. Group-

work of a more advisory character, directed by a senior staff-member

in collaboration with the social worker who is going to take charge in

the parole period, can be a valuable tool for this purpose.

Just before parole, it is sometimes possible to let the prisoner work

in a private enterprise outside the institution, so that he returns to

the institution every night. This helps the inmate to get acquainted

with some of the problems of daily life. In the Scandinavian countries

and in France this has been proved to be very valuable in giving the

man self-reliance.

VII. THE IMPORTANCE OF TREATMENT

It is sometimes supposed that the professional treatment of

criminals does not meet ethical demands. This is not the case. The

purpose of treatment is to try to give the prisoner a possibility to

develop an acceptable way of peaceful living together with the other

members of society. Psychologists have found that the prisoner

will have his own personality problems. His determination of value

will probably not be the same as yours or mine. The treatment means

support for what is supposed to be good and a reaction to what is

supposed to be bad, but it is not an attempt to mould him in accord-

ance with our personal ideal. Understanding of himself, with his

dreams and urges, his likes and hates and acceptance of the positive

possibilities he has in spite of his record, is supposed to be the safest

way for his future collaboration with other members of society.

To accomplish something in this direction is to achieve a social

advantage. Another social advantage is that such treatment will

enhance the respect for human worth and thus limit the urge to

counter-aggression. Its importance must be measured from a social

as well as from an individual point of view.

213

Di Tullio stresses the importance of therapeutic work with difficult

children, and this is no doubt a field that should also be remem-

bered, but the results will only be evident after many years. Mean-

while, many of the difficult prisoners will go out in society and

there destroy much for their children or for the children of the women

with whom they live. We must therefore also tackle the problems of

the adults.

Some administrators are afraid that treatment will be too expen-

sive, but it must always be remembered that long incarceration is a

very expensive remedy. The protection of the public obtained

through years of incarceration of some of the criminals may, when

these persons are not treated and helped, mean that they turn out to

be greater potential risks. It must always be remembered that simple

incarceration may result in considerable recidivism. It can be

limited through imprisonment for an incapacitating length of time.

This is expensive. The community’s need for atonement may thus be

fully satisfied, but this means that the time needed for atonement in

other and perhaps less dangerous cases will be proportionately long.

For the prevention of crime this is unfortunate.

For an acceptance of the necessity of treatment, the information of

the public is important. The information obtained through the news-

papers is insufficient. Usually it is based on single cases and mostly on

failures. The other source of information is from “progressive” friends

of a more humane treatment which they sell as a guarantee against

new recidivism. Both types of information produce as a result un-

necessary uneasiness. As neither can be avoided, they should be sup-

plemented by correct information, especially of responsible political

leaders. Detailed knowledge is the best way to neutralise the many

false impressions hampering public support of this community work.

A comparison between the results as they are to be expected without

professional treatment, and the results actually obtained during

experimental treatment, will be the safest way to the development of

clinical criminology. Prediction tables could also be developed so that

they could be an aid in the development of the individual treatment

programme. At the time for parole and the time for final discharge,

new tables could help to demonstrate the alterations obtained. Then

the evaluation of eventual recidivism would be of great scientific

value.

The value of the treatment for the individual himself should be

especially considered. The neurotic may eventually feel relieved; the

criminal will often, when treatment succeeds, be more neurotic than

before and consequently more insecure. Sometimes, after parole, he

says that he does not like the new way of life and it will often take

214

a long time for him to gain personal satisfaction out of this change.

If the outward aggression is changed to an inward aggression,

perhaps with suicidal problems, the personal value of such a result

may be difficult to accept. But if without this change, the public

danger had been great, from a social point of view treatment may

still be necessary. In such cases, the prisoner himself may think this

new state better than the former with its risk of new crimes, new

despair and new imprisonment. Several former prisoners recognise

the value of behaving in accordance with general ethical demands.

They may agree that the result is at least acceptable, but if the new

line cannot be kept, the risk of suicide is nevertheless very great.

Sometimes we must decide to let a man work his own problems out

as slowly as possible. This is the case when a prisoner has a long

sentence to serve. If such a man soon ‘“understands”, so that he is

prepared to begin to believe himself able to take up normal life, he

can easily get lost in new and equally serious problems. Thrown

together with maladapted persons of no interest to him, his daily life

will be more difficult than before. He will become opposed to his

comrades and will have to behave as if he were half on the staff, being

member of neither the one nor the other group. Our experience is the

same as Mackwood’s, who says: “It is often unwise to begin what

may prove to be a lengthy treatment (psychotherapy) before they

have faced up early to what lies before them, especially when one

cannot work through their uncovered material beyond a certain point

in prison. With these it seems wiser to note the case with psychogenic

factors for revision during the last years of their sentence, for this is

when the long sentence prisoner commonly starts to feel anxious.”

VIII.

MUTUAL REQUIREMENTS

If we are going to go through with professional treatment of all

recidivists, an intensive collaboration between all employees in the

institution is indispensable; and, likewise, collaboration between the

group active in the institution and the group later working with the

same prisoners in the community is essential. In order to satisfy the

administration, it is reasonable that every collaborator should know

enough of the terminology and the problems of the other groups to

make it possible to exchange experience without the demand that

these other groups distort the patterns of action, or modes of

expression that are normal for the profession.

In order to make a team, it is necessary for each member to feel

co-responsible for the mistakes members of other groups may make.

215

If the case-worker does not succeed, it may be because of insufficient

information from the psychiatrist, and if the psychologist goes ahead

with the uncovering of old conflicts with resulting disciplinary prob-

lems, it may be because the security staff (who will have to cope with

the trouble) did not report about the actual team work.

Mutual respect is needed to avoid professional treatment conflicts

in the wards, etc. Smooth running necessitates a training in clinical

criminology. It is inconceivable to train the medical man and his col-

leagues without at the same time giving them theoretical and practical

experience in diagnosis and treatment of patients. The same sort of

training is needed for the clinical criminologists. Nowhere have I

found a university offering such a course.

Treatment started in an institution must be followed up in the

parole period. Equally important is it that a man is in good training

when he leaves the institution, and that he has kept a good contact

with the free world so that he knows what happened during the period

he served time. He ought also to be able to continue to have contact

with the professional people in periods when he needs psychological,

medical or special psychiatric advice. At the same time, he has a job

to take care of. A sick man can leave his job and go to the doctor; an

alcoholic, a criminal, perhaps just as much in need of professional

help and for longer time, must try to get such help outside normal

working hours. Follow-up clinics for work of this sort must be

developed. The closest possible contact between the work before and

after the day of parole is a very strong requirement. It may mean

greater expenses for travelling but these will certainly be repaid. A

treatment unit should be of reasonable size. As long as incarceration

was the primary method for the protection of society, the very great

institutions could be regarded as economical. When treatment is the

main purpose, it must be admitted that no one is able to follow the

treatment programme for more than about 400-500 persons. In any

greater unit, the director will be too much worried by a bad con-

science, and neither he nor his colleagues ought to have more to do

than can be managed without difficulty.

216

CONCLUSIONS

OF

THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS

ON CRIMINOLOGY 1955—LONDON

CONCLUSIONS OF SECTION I

Unanimously adopted by the Congress

The first Section of the Congress discussed its probiems in two

parts. In the first part the discussion centred around the problem of

definitions of recidivism. Various legal, penological and crimino-

logical definitions were proposed and discussed. Some delegates

questioned the usefulness of the concept of recidivism altogether and

suggested such terms as ‘““habitual” and “professional” delinquency

as more meaningful. Various views were voiced about the necessity

or otherwise of conviction as an essential element of recidivism

Finally, some delegates suggested the use of definitions according to

their aim. They argued that every definition, either legal or crimino-

logical, can be regarded as a tool, as a means to apply legal sanctions

or to organise research material. For that reason there must be a

variety of definitions according to different laws, legal systems and

research requirements. In spite of this wide divergence of opinion the

section elected a special sub-committee with the object of producing

an agreed definition or statement. The first report of this sub-

committee summarised the various points of view and another

attempt was made to reconcile the existing differences. This time the

sub-committee produced the following statement which was unani-

mously accepted by the commission:—

For different purposes the criminologists need different definitions

of recidivism. Recidivism in the criminological sense, therefore

includes the following main forms. It means:

(1) that a person after having committed a first crime which was

legally established, and having been convicted of it or in any

other way dealt with officially by society, then commits another

crime (recidivist stricto sensu),

(2) that a person after having committed a first crime legally estab-

lished and dealt with as before resumes his criminal activity

because of his “‘dangerous state” (recidivist lato sensu)

217

The second part of the deliberations of the first commission was

devoted to statistics. Some interesting statistical material was

presented from a variety of countries. With regard to methods, there

appears to be a trend from the descriptive statistics to operational

research, i.e. to statistics related to action. While descriptive and

general statistics were discussed mainly from the point of view of

international co-operation and comparison, statistics collected by

research workers for particular purposes appeared to aim mainly at

determining future action. In particular prediction techniques were

advocated as the best method in order to decide on the type of treat-

ment which would suit the individual offender. It was mentioned that

sentence policy can also be helped by statistical methods if it is proved

that certain types of sentence are more effective than others.

The importance of criminal records was mentioned in the dis-

cussion. These records are often destroyed according to legal require-

ments and some delegates expressed the desire that they should be

preserved as long as possible for scientific investigation by crimino-

logists.

A general dissatisfaction was expressed with regard to the present

state of international statistics. It was agreed that it is at present very

difficult to compare the statistics of different countries, even of

different regions within one country. Interpretation of statistical data

is even more difficult on an international basis. The following resolu-

tion was unanimously adopted:—

Be it Resolved:

That the Congress recommend that a committee be appointed

to examine the data on recidivism in the official criminal statistics

of various countries and to prepare a report suggesting minimum

objectives and standards for the collection and publication of such

data.

It was also agreed that such a committee could be formed by the

International Society of Criminology and that detailed suggestions of

individual members should be made to the Society.

CONCLUSIONS OF SECTION 1II

Unanimously adopted by the Congress

The study of symptomatology of recidivism has made it possible

to distinguish, on the one hand, a group of recidivists who have

218

accommodated themselves to anti-social activities, who have

acquired techniques for the perpetration of their crimes and who

display an increasing degree of criminal sophistication; and, on the

other hand, a group of recidivists who repeat their offences because

of their mal-adaptation, both socially and psychologically.

The study of the forms of recidivism, considered from the point of

view of the dynamics of criminal behaviour, cannot realistically be

separated from the study of the causes of recidivism.

Although, in its present state of development, the science of

criminology is able to make a symptomalogical description of

recidivism, it 1s not yet able to give a valid explanation of the etiology

of recidivism. However, the typological descriptions of the basic

forms of recidivism have considerable importance for the prevention

and treatment of recidivism.

The scientific study of recidivism must involve simultaneous

research in different countries of the world with different groups of

recidivists. Such research should be conducted at any particular

clinic or institute by a team of competent research workers.

Considerable interest has been expressed in using uniform lists of

data to be collected in individual case histories. Such lists should be

as comparable as possible in all countries and should lend themselves

to statistical graphing and analysis. The Section requests the Scientific

Commission of the International Society of Criminology to establish

a sub-committee which should study the scientific and practical con-

dition under which criminological research can proceed with teams

of competent workers, using uniform lists of data in the collection of

case history information.

CONCLUSIONS OF SECTION III

Unanimously adopted by the Congress

On the basis of the valuable general report of Professor Baan, the

section has discussed causes of recidivism. This raises the question of

the two concepts: Recidivism and cause.

As to the first concept there has been general agreement to take it

in a rather broad sense, comprising all offenders who, after having

fallen into the arms of the law, are found to commit a further crime

of some importance. To a certain extent attention has also been paid

to cases of repeated crime in offenders who never are caught and

found out. It has not been felt necessary in the discussion of causes to

go deeply into the problems of definition or to cling to a strict

219

definition of recidivism. Instead of drawing a sharp border line

between conduct labelled as recidivism and conduct not so labelled,

it seems more important to be aware that there are degrees of reci-

divism with continuous shades between the casual first offender and

the highly persistent criminal, and between recidivists in petty

offences and recidivists representing a real danger to society.

Nor has the conception of cause been thoroughly discussed. The

general report points to the modern tendency to use the less preten-

tious terms of correlations or factors instead of causes. It was gener-

ally agreed that it is no use our seeking for the cause of recidivism.

The term recidivism covers a variety of forms of conduct, and the

individual cases of recidivism grow out of a complicated interplay

between hereditary, personal and environmental factors in ever-

changing constellations. It has been felt, however, that the very con-

cept of cause, generally applied in a rather loose and perhaps incon-

sistent way, should be the object of further enquiry and clarification.

Perhaps the tools of modern analytic philosopy and semantics may

prove to be helpful in this respect.

It has been impossible to discuss the causes of recidivism isolated

from the question of causes of criminal conduct in general. The

factors, or the constellations of factors, which tend to lead up to a

first offence, must be assumed to play a role also in the repetition of

crime. Among these factors, the role of mass media, for example

press and cinema, has been stressed. But the section has endeavoured

to focus attention on the factors which have a special bearing on

recidivism. What characterizes the recidivist is that he continues to

commit crimes after having been caught and found out. We have

asked what special traits—in personality or in social and personal

conditions—do distinguish the recidivist as compared not only with

the average citizen, but also with the casual offender? Each single

case of recidivism represents a failure on the part of society in its

dealing with the offender. From this angle the question could be

put thus: In what cases, and for what reasons, are the sanctions

which society applies unable to counteract effectively the criminogenic

factors involved?

It has been generally agreed that a multi-disciplinary approach to

the problem is necessary. The study of recidivism as well as of other

forms of criminal conduct ought to be done in co-operation between

psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists and social anthropologists;

and the practical experience of lawyers, police officers, prison

administrators, ministers of religion and social workers is also

essential.

It has been a common thesis of criminologists that social factors

220

play a dominant part in the aetiology of the casual offender, and

personality factors in the case of the recidivist, but this can only be

accepted as a broad generalization. Examples from history, as well

as from several countries in our own time, show that social, cultural

and economic factors may play a dominant role also in the forming

of recidivism. Members from India, Kenya and South Africa have

given striking illustrations of this point.

As far as the individual factors are concerned it seems to be estab-

lished that mental disease and abnormal personality traits play a

much greater part in recidivism, and especially in grave and per-

sistent recidivism, than in casual criminals. When the criminal con-

duct has its roots in mental disease or abnormal personality traits we

generally have before us persistent tendencies unlikely to be corrected

by our penal measures. It has been strongly emphasized, however

that the labelling of offenders, for instance as psychopaths or mental

defectives, although it might be useful as a form of classification, is in

itself of little value in the process of understanding the dynamics

leading up to the repetition of crime. The labels just. give a starting

point for deeper-going investigation. Disturbances of conduct which

have led to the diagnosis of psychopathy, on closer scrutiny often

turn out to be due to mental processes of a quite different character

As to mental deficiency, this seems to have been over-estimated as a

factor in recidivism. As a result of recent investigations there is little

evidence that low-grade intelligence as an endogenous factor plays

an important role in the causation of recidivism. The difference in

1.Q. earlier found between the average population, the casual

offender and the recidivist, may often be due to differences in the

social and cultural background between the groups

The question of neurotic, conscious or unconscious, seeking for

punishment, as a factor in crime and especially in recidivism, has

been discussed. There has been general agreement that such cases

occur, but that cases where this mechanism is at work. or at least

cases where it can as yet be clearly demonstrated, are not frequent

It is a task for further investigation to discover if this factor plays a

role in a great number of cases. The need for protection against

criminal impulses has also been mentioned as another important

factor in recidivism

The problems concerning the professional criminal have been dis-

cussed at length. No doubt there exist cases of persons seeking their

living by crime, for instance pick-pockets, professional car thieves

burglars and so on. The number of such cases, however, greatly

varies according to conditions in different countries. But as to the

psychological explanation of the. phénomenon, views have differed

~-221

Some members are disposed to look upon the professional criminal

career as the result of a deliberate choice of profession, where the

prospect of gain on one side, the risk on the other side, are the

dominant factors together with a certain lack of moral standards in

the offender. Others—and among them the general rapporteur Pro-

fessor Baan—Ilay the stress on emotional factors such as hurt pride,

disappointment, frustration, resentment, etc., and contend that

nobody chooses a criminal career out of normal and rational con-

siderations. No agreement was reached on this point.

The social factors in recidivism greatly vary from one country to

another, a fact which has been illustrated during our discussions by

many examples. In some countries, among them the Scandinavian,

a very high proportion of recidivists are alcohol addicts. This fact

established, however, questions still remain as to the further indi-

vidual and social causes of the alcohol abuse, and the kind of relation

existing between the person’s abuse of alcohol and his criminality.

Lack of time prevented a further discussion on this point.

Among the factors determining the further fate of the criminal,

the penal system itself plays an important role. If society treats a

first offender in an unsuitable way, this obviously increases the risk

of recidivism, and if it treats a recidivist in an unsuitable way, this

likewise increases the risk of further recidivism. In cases where

punishment is unable to counteract the factors leading to criminality,

or even tends to reinforce them, other measures, for instance medical

treatment or measures of social welfare might be appropriate. It has

been felt, however, that it would fall outside the scope of the section

to discuss at length the problems of treatment.

Besides the legal sanctions also the general attitude of the society

to the criminal is of importance. Some comment has been made on

the tendency in the public, and even in prison administrators and

other officials, to look upon the convicted offender, not to speak of

the recidivist, as a person outside society, a man who merits sus-

picion and contempt. This attitude cannot fail to have repercussions

on the criminal himself and to increase the risk of his relapse into

crime. It is therefore important to develop a general attitude of

helpfulness and understanding towards the offender.

CONCLUSIONS OF SECTION 1V

Adopted by the Congress by 260 votes to 10

(1) That fundamental attention should be paid by legislators,

judges, correctional officials, clinicians and researchers in criminology

222

to the problem of recidivism as a major issue in the prevention of

crime and the treatment of offenders. In order to achieve these

purposes it is recommended that adequate prognostic services should

be established in the various countries.

(2) That the prognosis of recidivism can be improved, among

other methods, with the aid of prediction tables based on a demon-

strated high relationship between certain personality, character,

biological and socio-cultural factors on the one hand, and varieties

of conduct on the other.

(3) That the use of systematic methods of prognosis, including

validated predictive devices, should be encouraged; provided that

such methods are not applied automatically, but used as instruments

in the hands of teams composed of professional skilled workers

serving agencies charged with the administration of justice involving

juvenile and adult offenders.

(4) That, because of the close relationship between recidivism

and early delinquency (Friihkriminalitdt), it is advisable to encourage

the development and use of prognostic devices, including predictive

tables, in the prediction of early delinquency.

(5) That the utmost care needs to be taken in the definition,

assembling and verification of the factors which form the basic data

on which prognostic methods, including prediction tables, are built,

and in checking up on the actual extent of recidivism as related to

such factors.

(6)

That an indispensable aspect of any improved prognostic

technique is the validation of the predictive methods on samples of

cases other than those on which they were developed in order to

transform them as far as possible into effective instruments for

prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS OF SECTION V

Unanimously adopted by the Congress

(1) The Section felt that it is difficult to study treatment without

knowing the conclusions of the other Sections, especially those of

Section I (Definitions) and Section III (Diagnosis), but, nevertheless,

it proceeded as on the assumption that there was common ground.

(2) The following subjects were discussed:—

(a) Prevention:—Recidivism has many causes and the duty

of society is to improve social conditions. In particular

there should be less glamorisation of the criminal in the

press.

223

(b) Legal Aspects:—It was agreed that on the whole we know

what is essential on a sufficient basis of law to ensure

adequate treatment of the recidivist (e.g., indeterminate

sentences or measure of security). Increasing the length

or severity of punishments should not be recommended

The choice of the judge in sentencing should not be too

limited

©

Penal Aspects:—It appeared from numerous statements

that in most countries the penal administration is very

much aware of the need to provide suitable methods for

dealing with recidivists. Work, vocational training and

general education retain their value. The Section was

however, well aware that such methods are not by them-

selves sufficient in modern treatment. It is essential that

such methods should be seen as part of a general plan

directed towards the reclamation of the individual. In

order to effect this it is necessary to ensure the closest

collaboration between all types of staff and particularly

between specialist and administrative personnel. It is

essential, further, that we should have greater knowledge

of the offender, his history and make-up, and his needs

and the nature of his experience in the institution

- The training of staff should consist not only in theo-

retlcal principles, but in properly superv1sed work with

offenders.

The Section believed that the most important gaps in

knowledge of treatment are:—

On the one hand the long-term study of the offender

It was proposed in this connection that an international

group should be formed to exchange case histories

On the other hand, the creation of suitable classi-

fications in vxew of the nature of institutional treat-

ment.

The Role of Professional Treatment:—

(1) For the planning of professional treatment it is more necessary

to know the prisoner’s personality pattern, his estimation of himself.

his educational background and social possibilities and type of

criminal behaviour, than his formal conviction

(2) For good teamwork all members, including the security staff

must be trained so that they can understand the general plan of

treatment and the importance of accurate and detailed observation.

(3) It is essential that the prison staff has a elear idea of the

> 224

conditions under which the offender will live after parole and that

the officer supervising after-care should be part of the team. Only in

this way can there be continuity of treatment.

(4) One of the prime problems of the prisoner is his “loneliness”,

a feeling that no one respects him as a human being. This should be

counteracted by including the offender in groups with professional

and security staff. It is essential that the offender should be carefully

prepared for this type of treatment and, indeed, any method not

familiar to him, or new to the institutional setting.

(5) The Section also discussed the value and application of

specialised medical and surgical methods of treatment, in particular

lobotomy, castration and, especially for paranoids, the use of new

drugs.

225

CcC-pP

NATIONAL REPORTS

Austria

Horrow (M.).—Dkefinition des Riickfalls und Riickfallstatistik.

SEELIG (Ernst) and BeLLAvIiC (Hans).—Die Riickfallsformen des

Verbrechens und deren Entwicklung.

Belgium

ALEXANDER (M.).—A Propos de la Récidive des Anormaux.

BoMBOIR (A.).—Etude Comparée de délinquants psychopathes

internés et de délinquants récidivistes condamnés.

LEY (Auguste).—Prognosis of Recidivism.

VAN HELMONT (M.).—Le Traitement des Récidivistes.

Canada

BEAUSOLEIL (Julien).—Les Récidivistes.

Cuba

MARTINEZ (José Agustin).—Causas de la reincidencia.

CHAVEZ MILANES (Francisco) and LANcCIS Y SANCHEZ (Fran-

cisco).—Tratamiento de la Reincidencia.

MORALES CoOELLO (Julio) and RAGGI (Armando).—Definicién de la

Reincidencia y Aspectos Estadisticos.

*SANTO ToMAs (Ed. Valdés).—Estudio descriptivo, Formas vy

Evolucion de la Reincidencia. Published in Enquiridion, Vol. 111.

No. 10, May-July 1955.

*VALDES-CASTILLO Y MOREIRA (Esteban) and SANTO ToMAs (Ed.

Valdés).—Prognosis de la Reincidencia Criminal. Published in

Engquiridion, Vol. 111, No. 10, May-July 1955.

France

BROUSSEAU (A.).—Contribution au Rapport sur Récidivisme par

Monsieur P. Cannat.

CANNAT (Pierre).—La Lutte contre le Récidivisme par la Fixation

des Multi-délinquants.

GALY (Giselle).—Les Formes du Récidivisme et leur Evolution.

GiscArD (Pierre).—Notes sur la Récidive et les Récidivistes.

PINATEL (J.) .—Le Pronostic du Récidivisme.

StaNnciu (V. V.).—La Situation dans L’Etiologie de la Récidive.

226

France

*VERNET (J.).—Le Récidivisme d’aprés les Statistiques de 13,000

dossiers du C.N.O. des Prisons de Fresnes. Published in Revue

Internationale de Droit Penal. 1° and 2’ trimestres, 1955.

Germany

*KRrEBs (Albert).—Probleme der Behandlung Riickfilliger in der

Strafanstalt. Published in Zeitschrift fiir die gesamte Strafrechts-

wissenschaft, 68. Band/2. Heft.

VoN WEeBER (H..—Der Begriff des Riickfalls im deutschen

Strafrecht.

WURTENBERGER (Thomas).—Les Causes du Récidivisme.

Greece

TRIANTAPHYLLIDIS (Char.).—Le Traitement Pénal des Délinquants

Récidivistes et d’Habitude Dangereux en Grece.

TsiTSOURAS (Menelaos Ch.).—Causes du Récidivisme.

Iraq

PerTOW (Abdul Jalil).—Report on Penal Treatment for Recidivism.

Israel

HERMON (Z.).—Recidivism in the State of Israel.

Italy

ALTAVILLA (Enrico).—Valeur Psychologique et Juridique de la

Distinction entre “Récidive Spécifique’ et “Générique”.

D1 TuLLio (Benigno).—Les Causes du ‘“‘Récidivisme”.

Netherlands

CorrriE (P. J.).—Definitions of Recidivism and their Statistical

Aspects.

HoLLANDER (F.).—Treatment of Recidivism.

OVERBEEK (W. H.).—Quelques Remarques sur la Proonostique du

Récidivisme.

VAN BEMMELEN (J. M.).—Recidivism and the Constancy of Crime.

VAN DE WERK (M. B.).—Statistical Aspects of Recidivism of Minors

in the Netherlands.

WIERSMA (D.).—Les Causes Psychiques du Récidivisme Criminel.

Norway

ANDENAES (Johannes).—The Treatment of Recidivism in Norway.

227

Norway

*CHRISTIE (Nils).—Definitions of Recidivism and their Statistical

Aspects. Published in Nordisk Tidsskrift for Kriminalvidenskab

Vol. 44, 1956 (““Tilbakefall i Norge’’)

South Africa

VENTER (H. J.). —Recidivism.

Sweden

RENGBY (Sven).—Un Projet de Statlsthue Officielle de 1a Récidive

en Suéde.

Switzerland

BAUMGARTNER (Ulrich).—Behandlung von Riickfallverbrechern in

Straf—und Verwahrungsanstalten

DUKOR (Benno).—Psychiatrischer Rapport

FREY (Erwin R.).—Entstehung, Ursachen und Prognose der Riick-

fallskriminalitit

MULLER (Ernst).—Die Behandlung Jugendlicher Riickfallsverbrecher

in Anstalten

SCHULTZ (Hans).—Definitionen und Statistische Erfassung des

Riickfalls fiir die Schweiz

Turkey

ERMAN (Sahir).—Le Traitement des Récidivistes

GozUBUYUK (A. Pulat).—Définition Juridique du Récidivisme

*KUNTER (Nurullah).—Les Facteurs du Récidivisme en Turquie

Published in Annales de la Faculté de Droit d’Istanbul, No. 5

1956. Turkish translation: Ord. Prof. Muammer Rasit Sevig’e

Armagan, Istanbul, 1956. (In honour of Prof. M. R. Sevig.)

United Kingdom

FAIRN (R. Duncan).—Treatment of the Recidivist (Penological);

England and Wales.

GiBBENS (T. C. N.).—English Research in the Causes of Recidivism

1950-55: Psychiatric and Psychological Aspects

GRUNHUT (M.).—Causes of Recidivism: Sociological

LoDGE (T. S.).—Recidivism—Statistics

Mackwoob (John C.).—A Clinical Contribution to the Treatment

of Recidivism

ScotT (Peter).—An Account of the work completed in Britain during

the last 5 years on the subject of the Prognosis of Recidivism

228

United Kingdom

SPENCER (John).—Descriptive Study of the forms of Recidivism and

their evolution

TAYLOR (R. S.).—Psychological aspect of Recidivism

WILKINS (L. T.).—Prediction in Criminology in England

U.S.A

BATES (Sanford).—Causes of Recidivism

MoNACHESI (Elio D.).—The Prognosis of Recidivism: American

Studies

OHLIN (Lloyd E.).—Some Parole Prediction Problems in the United

States

SELLIN (Thorsten).—Statistics on Recidivism in the United States

TAPPAN (Paul W.).—Treatment of Recidivism

Venezuela

TrocoNIs (Mendoza J. R.).—Estudis Acerca del Recndmsmo en

Venezuela.

SPECIAL REPORTS

ANDERSEN (Ch.) (Belgium).—Psychological Aspect of Recidivism

BANAY (Ralph) (U.S.A.).—Masked Schizophrenic Reactions and

Persistent Criminal Behaviour

BARRY (The Hon. Mr. Justice) (Australia).—Maconochie—An early

Pioneer of Penal Treatment

BERGER (Herbert) (U.S.A.).—Recidivism in Narcotic Addiction.

*Bize (B. R.), MiCHARD (M. H.), SINOIR (G.) with an Introduction by

SIMEON (Jacques), and the collaboration of Drs. Blanc and Jolivet,

M. Dhallenne, M. G. Thevenis, J. Jaffre and J. Villiers (France).—

Etude sur le Récidivisme des Mineurs. Published in Revue Inter-

nationale de Droit Pénal, Nos. 1 and 2, 1° and 2° trimestres, 1955

BONNARD (A.) (U.K.).—Clinical Standards of Prognosis in Juvenile

Delinquency—an after-history study

BROUSSEAU (A.) (France).—Correlation between recidivism and

functional or anatomical changes of the brain

CAsTEION (Federico) (Spain).—Recidivism and Banknote Forgery

*CENAC (Michael) (France).—Récidive des Actes anti-Sociaux: Etude

Médico-légale et Psychiatrique

Published in Revue de Science

Criminelle et de Droit Pénal comparé, No. October-December

1955

229

*CLINARD (Marshall B.).—Frontiers of Research in Criminology

Published in British Journal of Delinquency, Vol. 7, No. 2 (October

1956)

FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES FONCTIONNAIRES SUPERIEURS DE

PoLicE.—La Police devant le Récidivisme

FERREIRA (C. V.) (Uruguay).—Ductless Glands and Recidivism

FrRYM (Marcel) (U.S.A.).—The Treatment of Recidivists. Published

in Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, Vol

47, No. 1, May-June 1956

GALY (Giselle) (France).—FEtude Statistique portant sur 315 Voleurs

Adultes Récidivistes condamnés a de longues peines et examinés

au Centre National d’Orientation de Fresnes

GLUEcK (B.) and BrRANDON (Isa.) (U.S.A.).—Sex Offenders—A

Team Study

GLUECK (Eleanor T.) (U.S.A.).—Detection of Potential Delinquents

*GLUECK (Eleanor T.) (U.S.A.).—Status of Glueck Prediction

Studies. Published in The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology

and Police Science, Vol. 47, No. 1, May-June 1956

GLUECK (Eleanor and Sheldon) (U.S.A.).—A Preview of “Physique

and Delinquency

GLUECK (Eleanor).—Validation of Prediction Tables in Unraveling

Juvenile Delinquency.

Hapz1 (Vladimir) (Yugoslavia).—Les Problemes de la Délinquance

Socio-Economique.

*Hapz1 (Vladimir) (Yugoslavia) ——The Individualisation of after-

care. Published in Bulletin de la Société Internationale de Crimino-

logie, 2-¢me semestre 1957. Monatsschrift fiir Kriminologie und

Strafrecht

HarTELIUS (Hans) (Sweden).—A Psychodynamic View of Early

Recidivism

HARTMANN (Rudolf) (Austria).—Correlations between the criminal

neglect of vehicle drivers and several other forms of criminality

HossoN (J. D.) (U.K.).—Emotional reaction of arrested murderers

to their crime, their trial and their sentence

JuLLiEN (H.) (France).—Etude Comparative sur des Résultats

Obtenus aux Epreuves Psychotechniques entre Rélégués et Can-

didats & une F.P.A

KINBERG (Olof) (Sweden).—Criminological Instruction in Sweden

KINBERG (Olof) (Sweden).—The risk of Relapse in various types of

Crime, with special regard to the Influence of Alcoholism. Pre-

liminary report

Koskorr (Hon. G.) (U.S.A.).—The Legislator and the problem of

recidivism

230

MIRANDA (Manuel Rosales) (Mexico).—Study on Delinquency.

MonieR (Jean) (France).—L’Apprentissage Professionnel des Rél¢-

gués au Centre Pénitentiaire de Saint-Martin de Ré.

MosTAFA (Mahmoud) (Egypt).—Le Récidive en Droit Egyptien.

NAGEL (W. H.) (Netherlands).—A Descriptive Study in Criminal

Anthropology.

PessaGNO (Rodolfo G.) (Argentina).—Etiologia y Tratamiento de la

Reincidencia.

*Quiroz (Alfonso) (Mexico).—Concepto de Reincidencia y sus

Aspectos Estadisticos. Published in Criminalia, January 1956.

RiBEIRO (Leonidio) (Brazil).—Homosexualit¢ et Glandes Endo-

crines.

RiBEIRO (Leonidio) (Brazil).—Deux Cas de Psychopathie Sexuelle.

RiBEIRO (Leonidio) (Brazil).—Un Cas de Grand Sadisme.

RiTEY (Hector J.) (U.S.A.).—The Psychological Background of

Recidivism.

RUBINSTEIN (L. H.) (U.K.).—Short Clinical Paper on Causation.

RUBINSTEIN (L. H.) (U.K.).—Case history of a recidivist thief.

RYLANDER (G.) (Sweden).—Psycho-sociological Study of Murderers

in Sweden.

ScHMIDEBERG (Melitta) (U.S.A.).—Specialised Methods and Tech-

niques in the Psychotherapy of Delinquents.

SMIGEL (Erwin O.) (U.S.A.).—Public Attitudes towards Stealing as

Related to the size of the Victim Organization.

SMITH (Groves B.) (U.S.A.).—Sex Offenders and Recidivism.

StancCIU (V. V.) (France).—The Criminality of Unpunishables.

STERN (Leon T.) (U.S.A.).—The Treatment of Recidivism and the

attitude of the public.

THOMAE (H.) (Germany).—Recidivism and Technique of Life.

VERDEAUX (G.) and VERDEAUX (J.) (France).—Etude Electro-

encephalographique d’un Groupe Important de Délinquants

Primaires ou Récidivistes au Cours de leur Détention.

*VERDUN (M.), HEUYER (G.), BROUSSEAU (A.) (in memoriam), and

DE TAILLE (J.) (France).—An Anthropometric Study of Young

and Adult Offenders. Published in Laval Médical. Quebec, Juin,

1957.

*VERNET (R. P. J.) (France).—Contribution 3 I’Etude des Facteurs

du Traitement du Récidivistes.

Published in Revue de Science

Criminelle et de Droit Comparé. January and March 1956.

VIENNE (R.) (France).—Influence of Classical Ideas of Punishment

on the anti-social evolution of the Habitual Delinquent.

231

VULLIEN (R.) (France).—Considerations sur Certains Moyens

Thérapeutiques employés chez les Rélégués.

WATSON (G. A. B.) (Canada).—Report on Aspects of Forensic

Research.

WOLFGANG (Marvin E.) (U.S.A.).—Murderers and their Victims.

WURTENBERGER (Thomas) (Germany).—International Aspects of

Forgery of Works of Art.

Z1LBOORG (Gregory) (U.S.A.).—The psychological and penological

aspects of various types of Recidivism.

* Denotes that the paper has been published. The periodical in which it

appeared is indicated.

232

LIST OF REGISTERED MEMBERS AND

ASSOCIATES

Third International Congress on Criminology

AUSTRALIA

BARRY, Thé Hon. Mr. Justice J. V., Supreme Court Judge, Depart-

ment of Criminology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, N.3.

LoRKING, Miss D. P. E., Student at London School of Economics,

18 Temple Fortune Lane, Golders Green, London, N.W.11.

MOoRrRris, Professor Norval, Associate Professor Department of

Criminology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, N.3.

SOMERVILLE, Dr. D. McL., Psychiatrist, c/o Dr. M. Figgis, 3 North

Drive, London, S.W.16.

AUSTRIA

BAUER, A. J., Assistant in Vienna Main Prison, Engelsberggasse 3,

Vienna 3.

DoLEscH, Dr. W., Oberlandesgerichtsrat, Karl Schweighofergasse

8/25, Vienna.

FLEISCH, Dr. Herman, District Attorney, Bundesministerium fiir

Justiz, Justizpalast, Vienna 1.

GRASSBERGER, Professor Roland, Director, Institute of Crimin-

ology, Liebiggasse 5, Vienna 1.

HARTMANN, Dr. R., Oberlandesgerichtsrat, Albertgasse 3, Vienna 8.

HAUSNER, Dr. P., Sektionsrat, Bundesministerium fiir Justiz,

Justizpalast, Vienna 1.

REDLICH, Frau Dr. Carola, Head of a Sub-Division in the Austrian

Ministry of Social Affairs, Stubenring 1, Vienna 1.

Rock, Dr. Erwin, Official of the Austrian Ministry of the Interior,

Arsenal 3/24, Vienna 3.

SCHILLER, Dr. O. O., Psychiatrist, Psychiatric Clinic, University of

Vienna, 55 Tivoli Str., Vienna 12.

STRAKA, Dr. A. R., Police Official, Schulgasse 88, Vienna 18.

SzirBA, Dr. R., Police Official, Enkplatz 3/1, Vienna 9.

Tek USCH, Dr. R., Rechtsanwalt, Kirchengasse 7, Vienna 7.

233

BELGIUM

ANDERSEN, Dr. Charles W., Psychiatrist, Vlaamse Kunstlaan 1

Antwerp

ANDERSEN, Mrs. Simonne, Vlaamse Kunstlaan 1, Antwerp

CANT, Paul de, Premier Substitut du Procureur du Roi, 144 Avenue

Adolphe Buyl, Brussels

CoNSTANT, Professor Jean T. J., Avocat Général & la Cour d’Appel

de Liége, 227 Rue Ferdinand Nicolay, Saint Nicolas Lez Liége

CoRrNIL. Paul. Secrétaire Général du Ministére de la Justice. Pro-

fesseur a I’Université de Bruxelles, 524 Avenue Louise, Brussels

CourTOY, Paul, Avocat, 44 Avenue du Roi, Brussels

HEeLMONT, Marcel B. C. Van, Inspector General of Belgian prisons

50 Avenue General Derache, Brussels

LE BoON

Daniel J. O., Research Worker

88 Avenue Eug

Demolder, Brussels 3

LEY, Professor Auguste, Professeur honoraire de psychiatrie, Uni-

versité de Bruxelles, 86 Chaussée de la Croix, Ottignies

BRITISH HONDURAS

KING, Ethan C., Superintendent of Prisons, British Honduras

CANADA

MAcLEoD, Allen J., Q.C., Director, Criminal Law Section, Depart-

ment of Justice, Ottawa

MaiLLoux, Professor Noel, Professor and Head of Psychology

Department, Université de Montréal, Case Postale 6128, Mon-

treal 26, P.Q

WATSON, Rev. Gordon A. B., Research Fellow in Penology and

Ethics (Moral Philosophy), Trinity College, Hoskin Avenue

Toronto

CEYLON

CUMARASWAMY, Ponniah, Superintendent of Prisons

Ceylon

Colombo

FERNANDO, Dr. G. P. S., Psychiatrist, Department of Prison and

Probation Services, Ceylon, Colombo

PiLral, V. N., Deputy Commissioner of Prison and Probation

Services, Ceylon; Prison and Probation Services Headquarters

Colombo 9.

SiLvA, Reginald M. S. de, Psychiatric Social Worker Student,

Colombo Plan Scholarship.

SIRIWARDENA, Dr. T. A. Chandrapala, Psychiatrist Department of

Prison and Probation Services, Colombo

234

CHILE

BASAURE, Ignacio Garces, Sub-Secretario de Justicia, Ministerio de

Justicia, Santiago.

DRAPKIN, Dr. Israel S., Director del Instituto de Criminologia de la

Direccion General de Prisiones, Casilla 2876, Santiago.

DENMARK

CHRISTENSEN, E., Lecturer in Criminology, University of Aarhus,

Aldersroves 33, Aarhus.

CHRISTENSEN, Mrs. E., Aldersroves 33, Aarhus.

CHRISTIANSEN, Dr. Karl O., Lecturer in Criminology, University of

Copenhagen, Olesvej 10, Virum.

SCHLEDERMANN, Miss Karen, Social Worker, c/o Stern, 20 West-

bourne Street, London, W.2.

STURUP, Dr. Georg K., Director, Institute for Psychopathic

Criminals, Herstedvester, Vingards Allé 36, Hellerup.

STURUP, Mrs. E., Vingards Allé 36, Hellerup.

TETENS, Hans, Director General of Prisons in Denmark, Ministry

of Justice, Copenhagen.

WOLF, Preben, Assistant Director of Prisons in Denmark, Hejreskov

Allé 8, Humlebaek.

ECUADOR

ESPINEL-MENDOZA, Dr. Leonardo, Lawyer, P.O. Box 633, Guayaquil.

EGYPT

ALLAM, Hassam F., Prosecutor, Juvenile Court of Cairo, 11 Tibr

Street, Koubri 1-Koubba, Cairo.

ASKAR, Dr. A. M. Mohamed, Psychiatrist, Faculty of Medicine,

University of Cairo, 2 Rue Cherifein, Abdin, Cairo.

MOUSTAFA, Dr. Mahmoud, Professor of Criminal Law, University

of Cairo, Giza.

SOLIMAN, Professor Mohamad Ahmad, Professor of Legal Medicine,

University of Cairo, Cairo.

FRANCE

ANCEL, Marc, Conseiller a la Cour de Cassation, Paris.

BACHET, Dr. Maurice, Psychiatrist, 20 Rue de Dr. Roux, Paris XVe.

BERTRAND, Paul, Directeur-Psychologue, Centre Réeducation En-

fance Délinquante, Centre Lota, Ustaritz (B.Pyr).

BLANC, Professor Marc, Professeur agregé neuro-psychiatrie,

Faculté Médecine, Bordeaux, 52 Cours Alsace-Lorraine, Bor-

deaux.

235

FRANCE (continued)

BOISSON,~ Mlle Sylvie, Assistante Sociale-Psychologue, Prisons de

Mulhouse, Mulhouse (Haut Rhin).

CANNAT, Pierre, Magistrat, Sous-Directeur au Ministére de la

Justice, 13 Rue de Navarin, Paris IXe.

DAviDOVITCH, André, 9 Place St. André-des-Arts, Paris.

GALY, Dr. Giselle, 10 Rue Spontiad, Paris XVle.

GARNIER, Marcel H., Financial Comptroller to the Préfecture de

Police, Paris.

GERMAIN, Charles, Avocat Général 4 1a Cour de Cassation, 5 Quai

de ’Horloge, Paris Ier.

GOLDENBERG, Alex, Legal Adviser, International Criminal Police

Commission, 60 Boulevard Gouvion Saint Cyr, Paris XVlIle.

HENNE, Dr. Michel,

Médecin-Chef, & I’Hopital Psychiatrique,

Saint-Venant (Pas-de-Calais).

HENNE, Dr. Suzanne, Médecin-Assistant & I’Annexe Psychiatrique

des Prisons de Fresnes (Seine).

HEerzoG, Jacques B., Substitut au Tribunal de la Seine, Secrétaire

Général de I'Institut de Droit Comparé de I’Université de Paris,

75 bis Avenue Marceau, Paris XVle.

HerzoG, Mme Colette, 75 bis Avenue Marceau, Paris XVlIe.

LEAUTE, Professor Jacques, Professeur 2 la Faculté de Droit de

Strasbourg, and Directeur de I’Institut de Sciences Criminelles

de Strasbourg, 5 Rue des Ursulines, Paris Ve.

LeBovici, Dr. Serge, Médecin Assistant des Hopitaux de Paris,

Secrétaire Scientifique de I'Institut de Psychanalyse, 3 Avenue du

President Wilson, Paris XVle.

LeBovicl, Mrs. R., 3 Avenue du President Wilson, Paris XVlIe.

LEVASSEUR, Professor Georges E. T., Professeur a la Faculté de

Droit, Lille, 12 Rue de Chartres, Orsay (Seine et Oise).

MAGNIER, Léon V., Doyen de la Faculté libre de Droit de

Marseilles, 54 Rue Montgrand, Marseilles.

MAGNIER, Mme Anne, 54 Rue Montgrand, Marseilles.

MARTIN, Robert, Inspecteur Général Adjoint de I’Administration

au Ministére de I’Intérieur, 13 Rue de Saint Marceaux, Paris

XVlle.

MARTIN, Mme Robert, 13 Rue de Saint Marceaux, Paris XVlIle.

MARX, Mlle Yvonne, Sous-directeur du Service de Récherches juri-

diques comparatives, 36 Rue Vaneau, Paris Vile.

PINATEL, Jean, Secrétaire Général,

Société Internationale de

Criminologie, 28 Avenue de Friedland, Paris VIile.

PINATEL, Mme, 28 Avenue de Friedland, Paris VIile.

236

FRANCE (continued)

SINOIR, Dr. Guy, Psychologue Attaché a la Direction de ’Education

Surveillée, Ministére de la Justice, 4 Place Vendome, Paris Ier.

STANCIU, V. V., Professeur-adjoint a I’Ecole Supérieure d’an-

thropo-biologie de Paris, 12 bis Place H. Bergson, Paris.

SusINI, J., Société Internationale de Criminologie, 28 Avenue de

Friedland, Paris Vilie.

ToLMAN, Mlle Yvonne E., Barrister-at-Law, 9 Boulevard Saint-

Martin, Paris.

TOUREN, André,

Directeur de 1I’Administration Pénitentiaire,

Ministére de la Justice, 4 Place Vendome, Paris Ier.

VERDUN, Professor Dr. Maurice, S.J., Professeur a I’'Institut Catho-

lique, 42 Rue de Grenelle, Paris Vile.

VERNET, Joseph M. C., Aumonier Général des Prisons de France,

35 Rue de Sévres, Paris Vie.

VIENNE, Roger, Vice-Président du Tribunal, Chargé de cours a la

Faculté de Droit, Lille, Avenue Foch, Marcq-en-Baroeul (Nord).

VILLETORTE, Paul, Commissaire principal, 11 Rue des Saussaies,

Paris Villie.

GERMANY

BRAUNECK, Dr. Anne E., Research Fellow, Seminar fiir Strafrecht

und Kriminologie, Hamburg University, Moorweidenstr. 7,

Hamburg 13.

FLIK, Dr. Gotthilf, Superintendent of a Boys’ Reformatory and

Teacher of Criminology at the University of Erlangen, Nieder-

schonenfeld, Near Donauwdrth, Bavaria.

KIELWEIN, Dr. Gerhard, Landgerichtsrat und Dozent, Bundesjustiz-

ministerium, Bonn.

KLEIN, Dr. Herbert, Oberstaatsanwalt, 39 Josefsstrasse, Mainz.

KocH, Professor Dr. Rudolf, Director of the Institute of Forensic

Medicine and Criminology, University of Halle/Saale, Eastern

Germany, Franzosenweg 1, 19a Halle/Saale C.1.

KocH, Frau Charlotte, Franzosenweg 1, 19a Halle/Saale C.1.

KRrEBS, Dr. Albert, Leiter der Abt. Strafvollzug im Hess Minis-

terium der Justiz. Beauftragte Lehrkraft an der Philipps-Uni-

versitit, Marburg, Am Hang 13, Oberursel/Taunus.

KREBS, Frau Doris, Am Hang 13, Oberursel /Taunus.

OEHLER, Professor Dr. Dietrich, Ord. Professor der Rechte an der

Freien Universitit, Berlin, Buchsweilerstr. 20, Berlin-Zehlendorf.

SiEVERTS, Professor Rudolf, Professor of Criminal Law and Crimi-

nology, University of Hamburg, Moorweidenstr 18, Hamburg 13.

237

GERMANY (continued)

STEGMANN, W., Oberstaatsanwalt, Grindelhof 81, Hamburg 13.

WEGNER, Professor Dr. Arthur, Ordinarius Professor of Laws,

University of Miinster, Breul 23, Miinster in Westphalia.

WEGNER, Frau A. E., B.Sc. (Econ.), Breul 23, Miinster in Westphalia.

WURTENBERGER, Professor Thomas, Professor fiir Strafrecht u.

Kriminologie, University of Freiburg, Holbeinstr. 161, Freiburg,

i.Br.

WURTENBERGER, Frau Ingrid, Holbeinstr. 161, Freiburg, i.Br.

GHANA

HorLrLAND, Patrick C., District Magistrate, H.M. Overseas Civil

Service, Accra.

RiBY-WILLIAMS, James, Social Worker, P.O. Box 778, Accra.

GREECE

SPANOS, Miss Helen, Grad. Student at the London School of

Economics, Flat 4, 72 Marlborough Place, London, N.W .8.

GUATEMALA

PAaLoMo, Francisco, Chargé d’Affaires a.i. of Guatemala, Legation

of Guatemala, 30 Collingham Gardens, London, S.W.5.

HONDURAS REPUBLIC

Suazo, Carlos A., Chargé d’Affaires of Honduras, Flat 5, 15

Mount Street, London, W.1.

INDIA

DuBey, A. K., Probation Officer, Organising Secretary, All India

Crime Prevention Society, Old Post Office, Hazratganj, Lucknow.

SINGH, Sarb Jit, L1.M. (Criminology) Student, Institute of Advanced

Legal Studies, University of London, 25 Russell Square, London,

w.C.1.

TALPALLIKAR, Miss Mandakini B., Probation Officer, Bombay,

c/o V.D. Tulzapurkar, Advocate, “Badrikashram’, Top Floor,

Khetwadi 2nd lane, Girgaum, Bombay 4.

UGRrA, Jaikaran Nath, Inspector General of Prisons, U.P., Uttar

Pradesh, Lucknow, U.P.

VARMA, Paripurnanand, President, The All India Crime Prevention

Society, Member of Legislative Assembly, U.P., Behari Niwas,

Kanpur.

238

INDONESIA

KEPENDJARAAN, Kantor Besar Djawatan (Kementerian Kehaki-

man), Djakarta.

IRAQ

EL-AN1, Shakir, Attorney General of Iraq, Ministry of Justice,

Baghdad.

PErRTOW, Judge Abdul Jalil, Judge of the Court of Cassation,

Ministry of Justice, Baghdad.

ISRAEL

HEerRMON, Dr. Zvi, Commissioner of Prisons, Israel, Ministry of

Police, Hakirya, Tel Aviv.

MiLLo, Efraim, Director of Juvenile Probation Service, Ministry

of Social Welfare, Jerusalem.

REIFEN, David, Juvenile Court Judge, 13 Witkin Street, Tel Aviv.

ITALY

BORRELLI, Manlio, Primo Presidente della Corte d’Appello di

Milano, Palazzo di Giustizia, Milan.

CATTABENI, Professor C. Mario, University Professor, Milan, Viale

Giau Galeazzo 16, Milan.

CAVALLO, Professor Vincenzo, Professor of Criminal Law at Uni-

versity of Messina, Via Roma 132, Salerno.

DELESSERT, Miss Mirella, Via Carducci 12. Milan.

ERRA, Carlo, Magistrat de Cour d’Appel, Via A. G. Barrili 49,

Rome.

ERRA, Signora Anna, Via A. G. Barrili, 49 Rome.

FINI, Nicola, General Director of Penal Affairs (Italian Ministry

of Justice), Viale Mazzini 114A, Rome.

FIN1, Signora Teresa, Viale Mazzini 114A, Rome.

LATTANZI, Giuseppe, General Director of Penitentiary Establish-

ments, Italian Ministry of Justice, Via Marcello Prestinari 13,

Rome.

LATTANZI, Signora Maria, Via Marcello Prestinari 13, Rome.

NUVOLONE, Professor Pietro, Professor of Criminal Law in the

University of Pavia, Corso Vittorio Emanuel 146, Piacenza.

PETROCELLI, Professor Biagio, Professore ordinario di diritto penale

nell’Universita di Napoli, Piazza Sannazzaro 63, Naples.

P1ETRONI, Judge Romolo, Via Ferdinando Pinelli 2, Rome.

PisAPIA, Professor Gian Domenico, Titolare di Diritte Penale nell’

Universita, Via Podgora 4, Milan.

239

ITALY (continued)

R UGGIERO, Mario de, Consigliere della Corte di Appello di Milano,

Via Archimede 32, Milan.

STEFANO, Dr. Maria Italia Di, Assistant in Criminal Law, University

of Rome, Via Re Tancredi 8, Rome.

TuLL10, Professor Benigno Di, Professor of Criminal Anthropology,

University of Rome, Piazza Cavour 25, Rome.

JAPAN

ABE, Haruo, Public Prosecutor in Japan, c/o Mr. King, Jr., Harvard

Law School, Cambridge 38, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

KENYA

Lewis, Jack H., Commissioner of Prisons, Kenya, ¢/o Standard

Bank of S.A. Ltd., 9 Northumberland Avenue, London, W.C.2.

LUXEMBOURG

MERGEN, Professor Armand, Professor of Criminology, University

of Mainz, 43 Bd. du Prince Henri, Luxembourg.

MALAYA

OLIVER, W. Brian, Deputy Commissioner of Prisons, Federation of

Malaya, Taiping.

ROBERTSON, Miss Jean M., Head of Department of Social Studies,

University of Malaya, Singapore.

MEXICO

FrRANCO, Professor Ricardo, Professor of Criminal Law at Univer-

sity of Mexico, Ave. 5 de Mayo 32-305, Mexico 1, D.F.

NETHERLANDS

ANDREAE, Johannes L., Public Prosecutor, 10 Dam, Middelburg.

ANDREAE, Mrs. A. C., 10 Dam, Middelburg.

BAAN, Professor P. A. H., Medical Superintendent of the Psychiatric

Observation Clinic and Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, Ram-

straat 14, Utrecht.

BEMMELEN, Professor Jacob M. Van, Professor of Criminology and

Penal Law at the University of Leiden, Boerhaavelaan 34, Leiden.

BERGH, A. H. Hijmans Van Den, Assistant, Institute of Criminology,

University of Utrecht, Lepelenburg 2, Utrecht.

240

NETHERLANDS (continued)

BiaNcHI, H., Research-Assistant at the Criminological Department

of the Faculty of Law, Free University of Amsterdam, 22 Korte

Leidsedwarstraat, Amsterdam C.

BOLAND, Dr. A. P. M., Frans Halsstraat 51, Utrecht.

BUUREN, Hans Van, Chief Prosecuting Attorney at the District Court

of Rotterdam, 112B Rosenburglaan, Rotterdam.

Corrrig, Dr. P. J., Head of the Department of Judicial Statistics,

De Bruynestraat 49, The Hague.

GROENEVELD, Dr. Arnold, Medical Psychiatrist, Teacher in Crimino-

logy at the University of Amsterdam, 48 Jan Luykenstraat,

Amsterdam K.

KEMPE, Professor G. T., Stationsstraat 18, Utrecht.

NAGEL, Dr. W. H., Docent, University of Leiden, Rapenburg 61,

Leiden.

PoMPE, Professor W. P. J., Alex. Numankade 29, Utrecht.

ROOSENBURG, Dr. A. M., Mauritsstraat 76, Utrecht.

Rooy, Dr. M. H. Van, Head of the Department of Criminology of

the State University, Heresingel 36, Groningen.

RYKSEN, Dr. R., Director, Institute of Study and Information,

Ministry of Justice; Privat-Docent in Criminology, Chief Assistant

University of Utrecht, 40 Hercules Segherslaan, Bilthoven.

VERINGA, Dr. G. H., Sociologist, Ministry of Justice, Cornelis

Suyslaan 48, Rijswijk Z-H.

WIERSMA, Professor Dirk, Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, Crimino-

logisch Institut, Rapenburg 61, Leiden.

NEW ZEALAND

BARNETT, S. T., Secretary for Justice and Controller-General of

Police, Department of Justice, P.O. Box 8020, Wellington.

BoHLsON, Miss N. V., Borstal Officer-Instructress and Social

Worker, c/o New Zealand House, 415 Strand, London, W.C.2.

PRICHARD, Dr. Norman J., Medical Practitioner, Wellington.

THoMPSON, Richard H. T., Lecturer in Psychology, University of

New Zealand, Christchurch.

NIGERIA

CLARK, Alexander, Deputy Director of Prisons, Federal Prison

Service, Lagos.

PmL-EB(?s;E, John A., Magigtrate, Nigeria.

241

CC—R

NORTHERN RHODESIA

JONES, John L. B., Assistant Registrar of the High Court, P.O.Box 4,

Ndola.

NORWAY

ANDENAES, Professor J., Professor of Criminal Law and Crimino-

logy, University of Oslo, Ullernveien 17, Bestun, Oslo.

CHRISTIE, Nils, Research Fellow, Ullevalsveien 110, Oslo.

CHRISTIE, Mrs. Vigdis, Social Worker, Ullevalsveien 110, Oslo.

HALVORSEN, J., Chief of the Penitentiary Administration, Ministry

of Justice, Oslo.

KioLsTAaD, Dr. T., Psychiatrist, Chief Physician at Correctional

Training Institute, Opstad.

PERU

BUSTAMANTE, Dr. Felipe de, Second Secretary to the Peruvian Em-

bassy, Lawyer, 52 Sloane Street, London, S.W.1.

DEeLHONTE, Colonel Ernesto, Chief of Police, Lima, Peruvian

Embassy, 52 Sloane Street, London, S.W.1.

SOUTH AFRICA

JuNoD, Rev. Henri P., National Organiser, Penal Reform League of

South Africa, 25 Victoria Street, Waterkloof, Pretoria.

JuNoDp, Mrs. H. P., 25 Victoria Street, Waterkloof, Pretoria.

NEeL, M. J., Assistant Superintendent of Prisons, Union of South

Africa, South Africa House, Trafalgar Square, London, W.C.2.

VERSTER, V. R., Director of Prisons for the Union of South Africa,

South Africa House, Trafalgar Square, London, W.C.2.

SPAIN

RoMEU, F. Garcia, Attorney-General, Murcia.

SUDAN

FApL, Abbas Mohammed, Commissioner of Prisons, Sudan, c/o

Sudan Agent in London, Cleveland Row, St. James’s, London.

SWEDEN

AGGE, Professor Ivar, Professor of jurisprudence and Criminal Law

in the University of Stockholm, Tegnerlunden 10, Stockholm.

BERGSTEN, Per, Chief of Bureau, Department of Justice, Stockholm.

BoLIN, Lars, Chief of Section, Royal Social Board, Stockholm 2.

242

SWEDEN (continued)

ErikssoN, Torsten, Chief of Bureau, Ministry of Justice, Stockholm

HARTELIUS, Dr. Hans, M.D

Chief of Government Institute for

Delinquent Boys, Box 500, Vagnharad

HARTELIUS, Mrs. Ingeborg, Box 500, Vagnharad

KINBERG, Professor Olof W., Head of the Criminological Institute

Stockholm University, Bjorko, Orno

KINBERG, Mrs. Maja, Bjorko, Orno

KNoOOs, Dr. Helge, Chief Physician, The Forensic Clinic, Psychiatric

Hospital, Stockholm K

LiTHNER, Klas O., Assistant City Attorney (Public Prosecutor)

Doktor Liborius Gata 40, Gothenburg C

LITHNER, Mrs. Gunnel, Doktor Liborius Gata 40, Gothenburg C

MARNELL, Gunnar, Prison Governor, Hall, Sodertdilje

RENGBY. Sven F. N.. Statistician, Central Bureau of Statistics

Stockholm 5

RYLANDER, Professor C. Gosta, Professor in Forensic Psychiatry,

Royal Caroline Institute, Stockholm

TORNQVIST, Dr. K. E., Second Physician at the Clinic of Forensic

Psychiatry in Stockholm, Rattspsykiatriska kliniken, Stockholm 9

SWITZERLAND

BERNASCONI, Mrs. Carrie, Student of Law, Eyhof 5, Zurich 9/47

CLERC, Frangois, Professor at the Universities of Fribourg and

Neuchitel, La Goulette, St. Blaise

FRrEY, Professor Erwin, Professor of Penal Law and Criminology,

Hohenweg 6, Uitikon a.A., Zurich

FREY, Mrs. Christine, Hohenweg 6, Uitikon a.A., Zurich

GIGER, Hans. Student of Law, Forchstrasse 99, Zurich

KURT. Dr. Victor W., Chief of the Service of Penal Law in the

Federal Dept. of Justice and Police, Kornweg 10, Wabern C

Berne

TANGANYIKA

BRADDELL, L. H., District Officer, (Colonial Administrative Service)

Seconded to Judiciary, ¢/o Bromacre, Scotby, Carlisle, England

TRINIDAD

ARRINDELL, E. C., Assistant Superintendent of Prisons, Port of

Spain.

CAMACHO, Judge F. J., Puisne Judge, Supreme Court—Trmldad

and Tobago, Port of Spam

243

TURKEY (continued)

DONMEZER, Dr. Sulhi, Professor of Criminal Law, Hakuk Fakiiltesi,

Istanbul.

DONMEZER, Mrs. Merih, Hakuk Fakiiltesi, Istanbul.

UNITED KINGDOM

ANDRY, Dr. R. G., ¢c/o Department of Criminology, London School

of Economics, Houghton Street, London, W.C.2.

BAILEY, Alan O., Consultant Welfare Worker, 18 Endsleigh Street,

Tavistock Square, London, W.C.1.

BANKS, Dr. Charlotte, Lecturer in Psychology, University College,

London, 78 Old Church Street, Chelsea, London, S.W.3.

BENSON, George, M.P., Chairman, Howard League for Penal

Reform, House of Commons, Westminster, London, S.W.1.

BIrRD, Harry, Senior Probation Officer, Bromley, 5 Upper Park

Road, Bromley, Kent.

BoLt, Rev. W. J., c/o 4 Wellington Court, Eton Road, London,

N.W.3.

BoNNARD, Dr. Augusta J., Psychiatrist, 22 Norfolk Road, London,

N.W.8.

BRADLEY, John F., Senior Probation Officer, Tower Bridge Magis-

trates Court, Tooley Street, London, S.E.I.

BrIerLEY, Dr. Lorna M., Psychiatrist, 87 Valleyfield Road,

Streatham, London, S.W.16.

BrOwWN, W. Hewitson, Scottish Home Department, 23 Ainslie Place,

Edinburgh 3.

BUCHANAN, Mrs. Mary, J.P., Chairman, London Juvenile Courts,

102 Carrington House, Hertford Street, London, W.1.

BURKHART, Walter R., (U.S.A. Student), 119 Helix Road, London,

S.W.2.

CALVERT, Mrs. Theodora, J.P., Vice-Chairman, Howard League for

Penal Reform, Lollesworth Farm, West Horsley, Surrey.

CARROLL, Dr. Denis, Psychiatrist, President of the International

Society of Criminology, 28 Weymouth Street, London, W.1.

CARROLL, Mrs. E., 28 Weymouth Street, London, W.1.

CAVENAGH, Mrs. Winifred E., J.P., University Lecturer, Birming-

ham, 18 Farquhar Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham 15.

CHiISLETT, Albert J., Justices’ Clerk, Town Hall, Croydon, Surrey.

CHORLEY, Lord, Formerly Professor of Law, London University,

The Rookery, Stanmore, Middlesex.

CHRISTIAN, Harold B., Dental Surgeon (Home Office Prison Work),

1 Rosslyn Hill, London, N. W.34.

244

UNITED KINGDOM (continued)

CLirsoN, Rev. A. E. D., Methodist Mission Superintendent, 279

Whitechapel Road, London, E.I.

CRrReeCH JONES, Mrs. V., J.P., Member of Home Office Advisory

Committee on the Treatment of Offenders, Normanswood, Tilford,

Nr. Farnham, Surrey.

CREWDSON, Mrs. M. S., J.P., Low Slack, Kendal, Westmorland.

Criprs, Miss Jean G., Probation Officer, East London Juvenile

Court, 24 Drakewood Road, Streatham, London, S.W.16.

D’Arcy, Percy E., M.B.E., Secretary, Men’s Division, Central

After-Care Association, 66 Eccleston Square, London, S.W.1.

DAWTRY, Frank, Secretary, National Association of Probation

Officers, 2 Hobart Place, London, S.W.1.

DORMER, Chief Superintendent F. W., City of London Police, 26

Old Jewry, London, E.C.2.

DuNPHY, John P., Senior Probation Officer, London Sessions,

29 Romeyn Road, Streatham, London, S.W.16.

Epps, Dr. Phyllis, Medical Officer, H.M. Prison, Holloway, London,

40 Clarewood Court, Seymour Place, London, W.1.

FERNANDO, Dr. G. P. S., Psychologist, Inst. of Psychiatry, London.

FoGG, Kenneth M., Principal Probation Officer, Leicester, 39

Princess Road, Leicester.

FRANKENBURG, Mrs. Charis U., J.P., Salford, 3 Morpeth Mansions,

Morpeth Terrace, Westminster, London, S.W.1.

FRANKLIN, Dr. Marjorie E., Psychiatrist, 36 Carlton Hill, London,

N.W38.

FRrY, Miss Margery, Member of the Home Office Advisory Council

on the Treatment of Offenders, 48 Clarendon Road, London, W.11.

GIBBENS, Dr. T. C. N., Senior Lecturer in Forensic Psychiatry,

University of London, The White House, Woodland Way, Kings-

wood, Surrey.

GiLLis, B. B., Q.C., Hare Court, Temple, London, E.C 4.

GLOVER, Dr. Edward, Consulting Psycho-analyst, 18 Wimpole

Street, London, W.1.

GRAHAM-HALL, Miss Jean, Barrister-at-Law, 2 Dr. Johnsons Build-

ings, Temple, London, E.C 4.

GRAZ, Dr. Herta, Psychiatrist, 21 Regents Court, Park Road,

London, N.W.1.

GROVE, Miss G. J., c/o I.S.T.D., 8 Bourdon Street, Davies Street,

London, W.1.

GRUNHUT, Dr. Max, Reader in Criminology, University of Oxford,

20 Salisbury Crescent, Summertown, Oxford.

245

UNITED KINGDOM (continued)

GRYGIER, Dr. T., Senior Psychologist, Banstead Hospital, Sutton,

Surrey.

GUISE-MOORES, Miss S. M., Social Worker, Burrard Cottage,

Lymington, Hampshire.

HEATHCOTE, Miss M. W., Occupational Therapist, 11 St. John’s

Wood High Street, London, N.W.8.

HINDE, Rev. R. S. E., Fellow, Hertford College, Oxford.

HirscH, Dr. K. F., Assistant Psychiatrist, Cefn Coed Hospital,

Swansea.

HobGE, Dr. Ralph Sessions, Director, Neuro-Psychiatric Depart-

ment, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, Somerset.

Horrer, Dr. W., Psychiatrist, 21 Grove End Road, London, N.W.8.

HoLMAN, Mrs. A., J.P. (Supplementary), 10A Hornsey Lane,

London, N.6.

Howg, Mrs. A. M., J.P., Bromley, Homeleigh, 8 Garden Road,

Bromley, Kent.

INCH, Dr. T. D., Medical Officer, Department of Health for Scotland,

St. Andrews House, Edinburgh.

INMAN, Miss E. Elizabeth, M.B.E., Senior Probation Officer, Chelsea

Juvenile Court, 60 Hamlet Gardens, London, W.6.

JACOBSON, Mrs. P. J., 6 Avenue Road, St. Albans, Herts.

JAMES, Dr. S. G., Ministry of Health, Savile Row, London, W.1.

JONES, Dr. Howard, Lecturer, School of Social Studies, Leicester,

1 Salisbury Road, Leicester.

KLARE, Hugh J., Secretary, Howard League for Penal Reform,

Parliament Mansions, Abbey Orchard Street, London, S.W.1.

K UENSTLER, P. H., South African Research Fellow in Youth Work,

University of Bristol, Lyndale House, 19 Berkeley Square,

Bristol 8.

LITAUER, W., Research Worker, Institute for the Study and Treat-

ment of Delinquency, 8 Bourdon Street, Davies Street, London,

w.l1.

LYNCH, G. W, Lecturer, 43 Lonsdale Road, Barnes, London, S.W.13.

MACK, John A., Lecturer in Citizenship, University of Glasgow,

55 Southpark Avenue, Glasgow, W.2.

MackAy, Dr. G. W., Ministry of Health, Savile Row, London, W.1.

MADDIN, Miss Barbara, Barrister, 32 The Green, Richmond, Surrey.

MANNHEIM, Dr. Hermann, Reader in Criminology, University of

London, 20 Goddington Lane, Orpington, Kent.

MANNHEIM, Mrs. Mona, 20 Goddington Lane, Orpington, Kent.

246

UNITED KINGDOM (continued)

MAyY, Miss Margaret O., Senior Probation Officer, S.E. London

Juvenile Court, 112 Coleherne Court, London, S.W.5.

MAYLING, Miss Margaret J., Probation Officer, 6 Guildhall Street,

Folkestone, Kent.

McCLinTOCK, F. H., Assistant Director of Research in Criminal

Science, Squire Law Library, The Old Schools, Cambridge.

McCuLLoUGH, Miss M. K., Probation Officer, Willesden, 20 Princes

Avenue, London, N.I0.

McDouGALL, Dr. J. H., Consultant Psychiatrist, Moss Side Hospital,

Maghull, Liverpool, Lancashire.

MERTHYR, The Lord, J.P., Chairman, The Magistrates Association,

Hean Castle, Saundersfoot, Pembrokeshire.

MILLER, Dr. E., Physician in Psychiatry, 23 Wimpole Street, London,

w.1.

MoNTFORD, Miss D. R., ¢/o I.S.T.D., 8 Bourdon Street, Davies

Street, London, W.1.

NAIRN, Miss S. G., c/o I.S.T.D., 8 Bourdon Street, Davies Street,

London, W.1.

NEeL, John C., University Lecturer in Law, Glasgow University,

116 West Regent Street, Glasgow, C.2.

NorMAN, The Lady Priscilla C. M., J.P., Vice-Chairman of the

National Association for Mental Health, Thorpe Lodge, 17 Airlie

Gardens, Campden Hill, London, W.8.

ORGLER, Dr. Hertha, Psychologist, 8 Chesterfield Hill, Mayfair,

+

London, W.1.

PATERSON, Dr. Maxwell H., Clinical Psychologist, 4 Woodlands

Terrace, Glasgow, C.3.

PHILLIPS, Miss Edna M., Social Worker, 5 Ave. St. Nicholas,

Harpenden, Herts.

PHILLIPS, Miss K. D., Barrister-at-Law, 45 Fife Road, London, S.W.

PINKER, Rev. Martin W., President, International Prisoners Aid

Association, 66 Eccleston Square, London, S.W.1.

REES, Dr. John R., Director, World Federation for Mental Health,

19 Manchester Street, London, W.1.

ROBERTS, Mrs. Marjorie E., Welfare Worker, Meadow Cottage,

Brasted, Westerham, Kent.

ROFE, Miss Kathleen F., Child Welfare Officer, Mayford Approved

School, The Old Farm, Ottershaw, Surrey.

Rosg, A. G., University Lecturer, Dept. of Social Administration,

Manchester University, 8 Langfield Avenue, Whalley Range,

Manchester 16.

247

UNITED KINGDOM (continued)

RUBINSTEIN, Dr. Lothar H., Consultant Psychiatrist, Portman Clinic,

37 Ferncroft Avenue, London, N.W.3.

RUMNEY, Dr. David, Psychiatrist, 9 Swiss Close, Watford, Herts.

RYDER, Miss Sue, Prison Welfare Worker, Cavendish, Suffolk.

SAVILLE, Miss Eve, Deputy General Secretary, Institute for the Study

and Treatment of Delinquency, 8 Bourdon Street, Davies Street,

London, W.1.

SCHWARZSCHILD, Miss Agnes F., 184 Willesden Lane, London,

N.W.6.

ScotT, Dr. Peter D., Psychiatrist, Stamford House Remand Home,

and H.M. Remand Prison, Brixton, 53 Park Road, London, W 4.

SEAL, Miss Vera, University Research Assistant and Psychiatric

Social Worker, Bedford College, Regents Park, London, N.W.1.

SHEENAN-DARE, Miss Helen M., Headmistress of Girls’ School,

formerly practising member of British Psycho-analytical Society,

Abbey Cottage, Battle, Sussex.

SMITH, Mrs. Audrey, Psychiatric Social Worker, H.M. Prison,

Brixton, London, S.W.2.

SmiTH, Professor F. V., Professor of Psychology, University of

Durham, 7 Kepieo Terrace, Gilesgate, Durham.

Soppy, Dr. Kenneth, Assistant Director, World Federation for

Mental Health, 19 Manchester Street, London, W.1.

SPENCER, Dr. John C., University of Bristol Research Fellow,

Director of Bristol Social Project, 19 Berkeley Square, Bristol §.

SPURGIN, Mrs. F. Clare, J.P., Rodneys, Blockley, Moreton-in-Marsh,

Glos.

STIRLING-GILCHRIST, Major John, 42 Chester Square, London, S.W.1.

Stuppy, Sir Henry, C.B.E., Chief Constable of West Riding of

Yorkshire, Wakefield.

TAYLOR, Dr. Roy S., Senior Psychologist, H.M. Prison, Wandsworth,

12 Arterberry Road, Wimbledon, London, S.W.20.

WALKER, Mrs. A., Research Assistant and Psychiatric Social

Worker, Maudsley Hospital, London, S.E.5.

WaNNop, Miss Isabel, Headmistress, Gisburne House Approved

School, 95 Gammons Lane, Watford, Herts.

WarDrROP, Dr. Keith R. H., Psychiatrist, H.M. Institution,

Brightons, Nr. Falkirk, Stirlingshire.

WHITLOCK, J. W., Managing Director, Butterworths (Legal, Medical

and Scientific Publishers), 88 Kingsway, London, W.C.2.

WiLkins, L. T., Home Office Research Officer, 47 Links Way,

Croxley Green, Rickmansworth, Herts.

248

UNITED KINGDOM (continued)

WiLLiaMs, John E. Hall, Lecturer in Law, London School of

Economics, 3 Broadfields, Fast Molesey, Surrey.

WOODWARD, Miss Mary, Research Worker, Institute for the Study

and Treatment of Delinquency, 8 Bourdon Street, Davies Street,

London, W.1.

WORSLEY, George A., Prison Visitor, London, 108 St. George’s

Square, London, S.W.1.

ZEITLIN, Dr. Gloria P., Clinical Psychologist, 28 Marlborough

Mansions, London, N.W.6.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BANAY, Dr. Ralph S., Secretary-Treasurer, Medical Correctional

Association, 927 Fifth Avenue, New York 21, N.Y.

BARO, Dr. Walter Z., Physician and Surgeon, Strawberry Corner

Medical Bldg., Azusa Avenue and Arrow Highway, Azusa,

California.

BERGER, Dr. Herbert, Physician and Psychiatrist, 7440 Amboy Road,

Tottenville, Staten Island 7, New York City, N.Y.

BiBs, Joseph D., Director of Public Safety, Department of Public

Safety, Springfield, 1llinois.

BiGGs, Judge John, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals,

Wilmington 1, Delaware.

BiGGs, Mrs. J., Wilmington 1, Delaware.

Boyp, Dr. James 1., 8200 Marlboro Pike S.E., Washington 28, D.C.

BRANDON, Mrs. Isa, Senior Social Worker, New York State Psychia-

tric Institute, 722 West 168th Street, New York, N.Y.

BuLLock, Dr. Henry A., College Teacher, Texas Southern Univer-

sity, Houston, Texas.

CLINARD, Professor Marshall B., Professor of Sociology, University

of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.

EsseR, Dr. R. A., Neurologist and Psychiatrist, 187 Rue le I'Univer-

sité, Paris, 7e, France.

FRYM, Dr. Marcel, Director of Criminological Research, Hacker

Foundation, 160 Lasky Drive, Beverly Hills, California.

GAGNON, Dr. Salomon, Centre Street, Dover, Massachusetts.

GLUECK, Professor Sheldon, Roscoe Pound Professor of Law,

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

GLUECK, Mrs. Eleanor T., Research Associate in Criminology,

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

HACkNEY, H. Hamilton, Member, Parole Board of Maryland,

Finksburg, Maryland.

249

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (continued)

KATAN, Dr. Maurits, Psychiatrist, Cleveland, Ohio

KENNEY, Professor John P., Professor-Co-ordinator, Law Enforce-

ment and Correctional Administration Program, University of

South California

Koskorr, The Hon. Gertrude, Member of Congress, 33 Williams

Street, Plainsville, Connecticut

LEBENSOHN, Dr. Zigmond M., Psychiatrist, 1712 Rhode Island

Avenue, N.-W., Washington 6, D.C

LesINs, Professor Peter, Professor of Sociology, University of Mary-

land, College Park, Maryland

LINDESMITH, Professor A. R., Professor of Sociology, University of

Indiana, Bloomington, Indiana

MANLEY, Dr. Herbert D., Physician, 911 Park Avenue, New York

City

McCANN, Professor Richard V., Thompson Fellow in Delinquency,

Harvard University, Andover Hall, Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

MCINTYRE, Dr. Howard D., Physician, 903 Carew Tower, Cincinnati

2, Ohio

MCINTYRE, Dr. Aurelia P., Clinical Pathologist, 903 Carew Tower

Cincinnati 2, Ohio.

Nosis, B. M. Supermtendent Ferrls School for Boys, Wilmington,

Delaware.

PerL, Dr. William R., Clinical Psychologist, U.S. Army Hospital

A.P.O. 108, Munich

RAPPAPORT, Dr. Ernest A., Psycho-analyst, 111 N. Wabash Avenue

Chicago 2, 1llinois

RECKLESS, Professor Walter C., Professor of Criminology and

Penology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

RECKLESS, Mrs. Walter C., c/o Professor Walter Reckless, Ohio

State University, Columbus, Ohio

RITEY, Dr. Hector J., Psychiatrist, 815 Park Avenue, New York 21

N.Y

SCHWARTZ, Richard S., Lawyer and Teacher, Chicago, Illinois

SCUDDER, Kenyon J., Director Field Services, U.S. Osborne Associa-

tion, 318 Ruby Balboa Isl., California

SELLIN, Professor Thorsten, Professor of Sociology, University of

Pennsylvania, Phlladelphza

SELLIN,

Mrs.

. c/o Professor Thorsten Sellm University of

Pennsylvama Philadelphia.

SMIGEL, Professor Erwin O., Assistant Professor, Indiana Univer-

sity, Bloomington, Indiana

250

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (continued)

SMitH, Dr. Groves B., Psychiatrist, Illinois Southern Penitentiary,

Menard, 1llinois.

STERN, Dr. Leon T., Philadelphia Advisory Commission on Commit-

ment, Detention and Discharge of Prisoners, Room 149 M.D.,

1801 Vine Street, Philadelphia 2, Pennsylvania.

TAPPAN, Professor Paul W., Professor of Criminology and Law,

New York University, 28 Knickerbocker Road, Tenafly, New

Jersey.

THURLOW, Rev. Paul E., Lawyer and Clergyman, 19 E. Jefferson St.,

Joliet, 1llinois.

ZEMANS, Eugene S., Executive Director, John Howard Association,

608 South Dearborn Street, Chicago 5, Illinois.

ZILBOORG, Dr. Gregory, Psychiatrist, Vice-President of the Inter-

national Society of Criminology, 33 East 70th Street, New York 21

N.Y.

URUGUAY

FERREIRA, Professor Carlos Vaz, Caigua 3610, Montevideo.

~

YUGOSLAVIA

DmMITRUEVIC, Dr. Dragoljub V., Lecturer in Criminal Law, The

University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo.

HADzI1, Vladimir K., Avocat, Matice Srpske ul. 18, Novi Sad.

KoLENC, Riko A., Directeur du Department du Service Criminel de

la RPF de Yougoslavie, Secrétariat d’Etat de ’Intérieur de la

RPF de Yougoslavie, Kneza Milosa 90-92, Belgrade.

MARrkovic, Romislav, Directeur du bureau central des recherches

criminologiques, Secrétariat d’Etat de I'Intérieur de la RP de

Croatie, Runjaninova No. 2, Zagreb.

PAPAZOGLU, Dr. Dimitri, Professor at the Faculty of Economics and

Law, 64 Ilindenska, Skopie.

TAHovic, Dr. Janko, Professor of Criminal Law, University of

Belgrade, Boulevard Revolucija 87/LV, Belgrade.

YoDoPIVEC, Dr. Katja, Scientific Collaborator, Institute of Crimino-

logy, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana.

INDEPENDENT DELEGATES

UNITED NATIONS ORGANISATION

Lopez-REY, Dr. Manuel, Chief, Section of Social Defence, United

Nations Organisation, New York, U.S.A.

251

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE

PickFoRD, Frank, London Director, International Labour Office,

38 Parliament Street, London, S.W.1.

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION

BuckLE, Dr. Donald, Regional Officer for Mental Health, World

Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.

U.N.E.S.C.O.

MyYRDAL, Madame Alva, Director, Department of Social Sciences,

U.N.E.S.C.0,, 19 Avenue Kleber, Paris XVIe, France.

INDEI;ENDENT

AsUA, Professor Luis Jiminez de, Professeur de Droit Pénal, c/o

M. Soto, 3 Doughty Street, London, W.C.1.

ASUA, Mrs. Briel de Jiminez de, c/o M. Soto, 3 Doughty Street,

London, W.C.1.

UNITED KINGDOM COLONIAL OFFICE (Observer)

TERRELL, Richard, Civil Servant, Colonial Office, Sanctuary Build-

ings, Great Smith Street, London, S. 'W.I.

UNITED KINGDOM HOME OFFICE (Observers)

ALLEN, Philip, C.B., Assistant Under-Secretary of State, Home

Office.

FAIRN, R. D., Director of Administration, Prison Commission.

Fox, Sir Lionel W., C.B., M.C., Chairman, Prison Commission.

Goopg, Miss W. M., Assistant Secretary, Probation Division,

Home Office.

LopGe, T. S., M.A., F.I.A., Chief Statistician, Establishments

Division, Home Office.

NUNN, Miss J. J., Assistant Secretary, Criminal Division, Home

Office.

Ross, John, C.B., Assistant Under-Secretary of State, Home Office.