3 Status of repeat serious offenses and short-term repeat offenses
The previous subsection described the status of repeat offenses of serious offenders (research subjects), including whether or not they repeated an offense, by the details of their index offenses, by their criminal records, and by the treatment for their index offenses at each stage of correction and rehabilitation, etc. In this subsection the characteristics of the serious repeat offenses by serious offenders are described, taking into consideration their situation after the release that is identified by examining the final criminal case records of their serious repeat offenses (limited to those where such records were available). In addition, some serious offenders repeated offenses within an extremely short period after the release (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-20 and Fig. 7-2-3-2-21), and hence the situation, etc. under which they repeated an offense in less than one month after the release from imprisonment for their index offenses is analyzed through examining their final criminal case records, etc. of the repeat offense.
(1) Status of repeat serious offenses
A total of 88 research subjects repeated a serious offense. For 75 of them, the final criminal case records of their repeat serious offense were available. Table 7-2-3-3-1 shows the number of cases of their repeat serious offenses, by type of their repeat offense and index offense (cases of committing multiple offenses or repeating serious offenses multiple times were multiply counted).
Table 7-2-3-3-1 Status of repeat serious offenses by type of index offense
a. Offenders for homicide
Among those who had committed homicide as the index offense (limited to those whose records for the repeat offense were available; hereinafter the same in (1) of this subsection) five persons (in five cases) repeated serious offenses (including one person who had committed homicide and rape as the index offenses).
Two persons committed homicide as the repeat offense. One of them had been imprisoned for attempted homicide (index offense) against his girlfriend for being enraged against her who had refused to have a sexual intercourse with him. He repeated a violent offense (to “repeat a offense” refers to where one commits an offense after the release from the imprisonment for the index offense and was sentenced (and the judgment becomes final) to imprisonment or heavier punishment), and then killed a female working in the sex industry of whom he had been a client, because she refused to provide him with sexual services (he had a history of protective measures for attempted rape). The other had been a Boryokudan member since a juvenile, had a history of protective measures for attempted homicide and five previous convictions for violent offenses, etc. (in this subsection only the offenses that took place before the index offense were counted as previous convictions). He had been imprisoned for attempted homicide (index offense) committed in the conflicts in collecting debts and was released on the completion of the term of imprisonment. He then committed attempted homicide as the repeat offense while taking alcohol, as he was enraged with the victim believing that the victim spoke evil of him. He appeared to have an alcohol dependency.
One person committed robbery as the repeat offense. He followed a female for the purpose of raping her, and attempted to kill her because she called for help (attempted homicide; index offense). After the release on parole, he lived with his parents and had a job. He then ran away from home and committed attempted homicide at the scene of a robbery at a restaurant in order to obtain money for entertainment expenses, including for sex-trade shops (repeat offense).
Two persons committed rape as the repeat offense. One of them had been imprisoned for rape causing injury, etc. and homicide (index offense). He killed the victim who was a prostitute in a conflict which took place when buying her. He was released on the completion of his term of imprisonment, and then repeated rape causing injury (he had four previous convictions of property offenses, etc.). The other committed homicide against a shop assistant because he was dissatisfied with the service provided (index offense). He was released on the completion of his term of imprisonment, and then committed rape causing injury as the repeat offense (he had a history of protective measures for attempted rape, etc. and five previous convictions for attempted homicide, etc.).
b. Offenders for injury causing death
Among those who had committed injury causing death as the index offense three persons (in three cases) repeated serious offenses.
One of them had been an active Boryokudan member and had been imprisoned for accessory to injury causing death (index offense; the accomplice was the main perpetrator who was a Boryokudan member). He repeated Stimulants Control Act violations as the repeat offense, and thereafter, killed another Boryokudan member while drinking, because he was enraged with that member who picked a quarrel with him. Another person had been associated with Boryokudan and had been imprisoned for injury causing death (index offense), which was committed in relation to drug trafficking. He was released on parole, and thereafter, committed an injury causing death in the course of debt collecting of so-called black-market financing. The remaining other had been imprisoned for assaulting a work colleague who had been on bad terms with him to death (index offense). He was released on the completion of his term of imprisonment, and then attempted homicide as the repeat offense upon a Boryokudan member's request to obtain a reward (this case is cited as case [1] in (2) of this subsection; the same for cases [2] to [5]) (he had five previous convictions of property offenses).
c. Offenders for robbery
Among those who had committed robbery as the index offense, 35 persons (in 43 cases) repeated serious offenses (including nine persons who had committed robbery and rape as the index offenses).
29 persons repeated robbery (three of them committed or attempted homicide at the scene of a robbery as their repeat offenses). Three of 29 persons repeated robbery (robbery or robbery causing injury) twice. 19 of 29 persons had a previous conviction and eight of them had a history of protective measures for theft (one resulted in a conviction for theft as a juvenile) in addition to three or more previous convictions for theft. With respect to their residential or employment status at the time of the repeat offense, among 29 persons, 18 (62.1%) were without a fixed residence and 23 (79.3%) were unemployed. This shows that their residential and employment status became considerably worse compared to that at the time of the index offenses, where nine (31.0%) were without a fixed residence and 13 (excluding those whose employment status were unknown, 48.1% of 27 persons) were unemployed. Examining the cause/motive of the repeat offense it was revealed that, among 29 persons, for 13 persons, poverty was considered to be its main cause, six had the motive of obtaining money for entertainment, and 13 had a gambling addiction problem at the time of the repeat offense.
Four persons committed homicide as the repeat offense. Among them, two persons committed robbery and homicide as the repeat offenses. One of them had committed robbery causing injury at a game coffee shop (index offense). After the release on parole, he became addicted to stimulants and gambling, and then again to obtain money for them, committed robbery causing injury at a game coffee shop and homicide against an employee of the shop as the repeat offenses (he had a history of protective measures for violent offenses). The other had committed rape at the scene of a robbery (index offense). He was released on the completion of his term of imprisonment, and was then imprisoned again for Physical Violence Act violations within a short period of time after being released. During this imprisonment, he had felt that “my life doesn't deserve continuing,” and committed homicide at the scene of a robbery as the repeat offense on the day of the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment (he also committed preparation of homicide prior to this; case [2]) (he had a history of protective measures for property offenses, etc. and three previous convictions for robbery causing injury, etc.). Two persons committed only homicide as the repeat offense. One of them had been idling his time away and committed homicide at the scene of a robbery on the road (index offense), and after the release on parole, lived with his parents and had a job, but come to wish to return to the penal institution at a standstill, after he lost his job on the completion of the contract period. He then committed attempted homicide (random homicide) as the repeat offense. The other had committed robbery causing injury (index offense), and after the release on parole, killed his wife and child because he was unjustifiably resentful at them who lived apart from him to stay away from his violence.
Six persons committed rape as the repeat offense. Five of them had committed either rape at the scene of a robbery or robbery and rape as the index offenses, and therefore actually repeated the same type of offense, that is, rape.
One person committed arson as the repeat offense. He had 12 previous convictions, including one conviction for homicide and one conviction for arson, and had committed a convenience store robbery (index offense). In a short period of time after the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment, he came to decide to return to a penal institution. For this purpose, he committed an offense of damage to property (burning the property) and was imprisoned. Subsequently, he committed injury for the same reason/motive and was imprisoned, and moreover, afterwards, he committed arson again for the same reason/motive soon after the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment (case [3]).
d. Offenders for rape
Among those who had committed rape as the index offense, 31 persons (in 37 cases) repeated serious offenses (including one person who had committed homicide and rape as the index offenses and nine persons who had committed robbery and rape as the index offenses).
Among these 31 persons, 20 persons committed rape as the repeat offense, or, when regarding rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery as rape, 24 persons committed rape as the repeat offense (if rape at the scene of a robbery were to be regarded as rape, the number of research subjects that had committed “rape” as the index offense and repeated serious offenses would be 35, and among them, the number of those who committed rape, including rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery, as the repeat offense would be 27). 11 of these 24 persons committed rape/attempted rape/rape causing injury by breaking into the residences of the unacquainted victims as the repeat offenses and nine of them had committed the index offense which includes an offense committed in a similar way. In addition, eight persons committed rape/rape at the scene of a robbery twice or multiple times as their repeat offenses, and four of these eight persons had also committed rape/rape at the scene of a robbery twice or more times as their index offenses. Seven of 24 persons had a previous conviction for rape (in addition, one person had a previous conviction for forcible indecency) and four of these seven persons had a history of protective measures for rape or forcible indecency. With respect to their residential or employment status, of the 10 persons who, as their repeat offenses, committed robbery or rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery, four (40.0%) were without a fixed residence and eight (80.0%) were unemployed at the time of the repeat offense, and those without a fixed residence or without an employment increased compared to that at the time of the index offense. However, among 14 persons who, as their repeat offenses, committed only rape but not including robbery, five (35.7%) were without a fixed residence and five (35.7%) were unemployed at the time of the repeat offense, and thus, their unemployment rate at the time of the repeat offense was not very high.
16 persons committed robbery as the repeat offense (one of them committed homicide at the scene of a robbery as the repeat offense). 10 of these 16 persons committed either robbery/robbery causing injury/rape at the scene of a robbery and rape/attempted rape/rape causing injury or robbery causing injury and thereafter attempted rape as their repeat offenses (six persons), or committed rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery as the repeat offense (seven persons), and therefore, they actually repeated the same type of offense, that is, rape. As for these seven persons who, as their repeat offenses, committed rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery, it appears that they committed the acts of (attempted) rape as their primary purpose but not incidentally at the scene of a robbery. Excluding those that committed rape or rape/attempted rape at the scene of a robbery as the repeat offense, six persons committed robbery as the repeat offense and four of these six persons had committed rape and robbery as the index offenses. Three of them committed robbery against a female as the repeat offense and one of them committed forcible indecency against the victim of the robbery at the scene.
One person committed arson as the repeat offense and participated in the offense upon a request from an accomplice (relative).
e. Offenders for arson
Among those who had committed arson as the index offense 11 persons (in 13 cases) repeated serious offenses.
Eight persons committed arson as the repeat offense and one of them committed arson twice after the index offense. This person had a multiple number of previous convictions, including one for arson. He had been imprisoned for arson for the purpose of relieving his stress (index offense) and was subsequently imprisoned for burglary theft. Thereafter, he repeated arson twice within a short period of time after the releases on the completion of his terms of imprisonment in order to return to a penal institution. Another person had become tired of a life of repeating theft (he had four previous convictions for theft) and had committed arson (index offense) for the purpose of being imprisoned. He was released on parole but did not return to the halfway house in which he was directed to stay and was imprisoned for committing an offense of damage to property (burning the property) in order to vent himself. He subsequently repeated the same offense for the same purpose within a short period of time after the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment and was imprisoned. He then again committed arson as the repeat offense for the same purpose within a short period of time after the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment (case [4]). Besides them, four persons had committed arson (index offense) for the purpose of relieving their dissatisfaction/stress, etc. and committed arson as the repeat offense (three committed a serial arson) for the same purpose after being released (one person had two previous convictions, including one for arson, another person had a previous conviction for property offenses, and another person had four previous convictions for property offenses). All these six persons had no families and lived solitary lives. This is considered to be the background of their commission of arson in order to be imprisoned or to vent themselves. In addition, two persons had been imprisoned for setting a fire to other's residence with an anger/grudge (arson; index offense) and one of them committed the repeat offenses by setting a fire to other's residence against whom he held a grudge and killed its residents (homicide, attempted homicide, and arson). The other had repeatedly committed arson of residences that he broke into for the purpose of hiding the trace of a burglary theft (index offense). After the release on parole for the index offense, he committed attempted theft, and subsequently, committed arson for the same purpose (he had a history of protective measures and previous convictions for property offenses).
Two persons committed homicide as the repeat offense. One committed arson and homicide as the repeat offenses. The other was imprisoned for breaking into a residence for the purpose of theft and for setting a fire there because he could not find money and was irritated (index offense). After the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment, he got divorced upon the request of his wife, but then killed her for being disappointed at the divorce (he had a history of protective measures for rape and two previous convictions for violent offenses).
Two persons committed robbery as the repeat offense. One had four previous convictions for robbery, etc. After the release on parole for the index offense, he was imprisoned for committing theft, etc., and following its release on parole, committed constructive robbery causing injury (shoplifting was the modus operandi for the part of the theft) as the repeat offenses (he subsequently repeated theft, etc.). The other, after the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment for the index offense, repeated committing an offense to set a fire to a paper and place it in a mailbox (Postal Act violations) in order to be imprisoned, and was imprisoned for that offense and repeated the same offense three times within a short period of time after each release. After the release on the completion of his term of imprisonment, he felt despair at a decrease in the amount of the welfare aid, left the apartment where he was living alone, and committed attempted robbery being hard pressed for money (case [5]).
(2) Status of short-term repeat offenses
29 of the research subjects repeated offenses in less than one month after the release for the index offenses (hereinafter referred to as “short-term repeat offenders” in this subsection). Of them three committed homicide as the index offense, one injury causing death, 18 robbery, four rape, and five arson (two committed robbery and rape as the index offenses). As for the reasons for release for the index offenses, 24 were released on the completion of their term of imprisonment and five on parole. In addition, 16 short-term repeat offenders repeated serious offenses (repeated serious offenses are not limited to those committed in less than one month after the release for the index offenses).
The ages of the short-term repeat offenders at the time of their release from the imprisonment for the index offenses were, 20-29 for five persons, 30-39 for two persons, 40-49 for seven persons, 50-64 for 12 persons, and 65 or older for three persons. With respect to their imprisonment history, five were imprisoned for the first time for the index offense (first-time inmates) and 17 for the fourth or more times.
The first repeat offenses committed after being released for the index offenses are attempted homicide by one person (case [1]), robbery/attempted robbery/robbery causing injury by six, setting fire to objects other than structures by one, theft/attempted theft/habitual theft by seven, extortion/attempted extortion by three, damage to property by two (cases [3] and [4]), Firearms and Swords Control Act violations (bearing knives) by two, Postal Act violations by two (case [5]), injury by one, Physical Violence Act violations by one (case [2]), and Stimulants Control Act violations by one, etc. Apart from the person in case [1], etc. 23 persons repeated offenses twice or more after the index offenses. After the index offenses, 12 of them repeated offenses twice or more in less than one month after the releases and those in cases [2], [3], and [4] eventually repeated serious offenses following this pattern.
The residential and employment status of short-term repeat offenders after being released for the index offenses was as follows (for 14 persons whose residential/employment status at the time of their first repeat offense could not be identified from the final criminal case records of the repeat offenses or from the probation office's records, etc., their residential/employment status are identified as those indicated in the judgment for their first repeat offense). Among 24 persons released on the completion of their term of imprisonment, most of them, except two persons, had no relatives, etc. to rely on and those who had someone to rely on did not live with them after being released and had no fixed residences (one applied for urgent aftercare of discharged offenders and was referred to a residence but did not live there). These persons, excluding two of them, were not employed after being released. One of these two persons gained employment after being released but did not continue working and committed injury to vent himself as well as to be imprisoned again, as he got tired of being a member of society. Among five parolees, two lived with their relatives and gained employment. One of these two persons repeated an offense by breaking into the residence of the victim (female) and stealing contraceptive devices, etc. after the release on parole for rape/attempted rape (index offense) (also, afterwards, he committed an attempted rape, etc.). The other person, after the release on parole for robbery (index offense), associated with Boryokudan members and committed extortion with them while eating and drinking with them. The remaining three persons had no relatives, etc. to rely on but were granted parole under the condition to live in the halfway houses assigned to them. One of them gained employment but had an unstable life, such as changing jobs within a short period of time, etc. and committed theft, etc. as the repeat offense. Another person used stimulants a few days after being released on parole (he had eight previous convictions including two for Stimulants Control Act violations). The other person was the one in case [4].