pic_08 Provided by University Library of Tübingen Transcribed with Tesseract

This work is protected by copyright or related property rights but available in Open Access. The right of use and especially the right to reproduction is only granted within the legal limits of copyright law or due to the consent of the copyright holder.

 Summary of proceedings. Third International Congress on Criminology, Bedford College, London. 12th-18th September, 1955 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.