White paper on crime 2010 Part7/Chapter4/Section1/3
Based on the results of research/analysis of the research subjects points that require attention in the treatment of serious offenders by type of serious offense are discussed and presented below.
Homicide offenders are generally considered to lack an awareness of the need to respect the lives and bodies of others. This is indicated by the fact that the rate of previously convicted persons for violent offenses was approximately 30% (See (4) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2). In contrast to that the repeat offense rate of homicide offenders involving violent offenses was 5.5% whereas that of those with previous convictions for violent offenses 14%.
The type of homicide significantly differs because of the differing motives, etc. Of those who committed homicide due to Boryokudan power struggle, etc. (24 persons) the rate of previously convicted persons was remarkably high at 79%, the rate of previously convicted persons for violent offenses 50%, and the repeat offense rate high at 46% (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-2) with types of repeat offenses that included property offenses, drug offenses, and violent offenses, thus indicating a lack of moral awareness and a violent tendency to be their significant problems. Those that committed homicide due to anger/violent emotion (100 persons) accounted for 42% of homicide offenders (the repeat offense rate being 22%; See Fig. 7-2-3-2-2). Examining the judgment of the index offenses revealed that many of them had problems that included a lack of self-control and the warped view of trying to control others using violence (approximately 20% of homicides committed due to anger/violent emotion were against spouses or partners) as the background to their anger/violent emotion. In contrast, and as mentioned above, homicide committed against relatives has been on an increasing trend in recent years. The number of previous convictions of those that committed homicide against relatives (71 persons) was smaller (See Fig. 7-2-1-2-3) and the repeat offense rate lower (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-1) than that of other homicide offenders. None of those that had killed a relative due to exhaustion from nursing care, etc. then repeated an offense (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-2).
Of those that had committed injury causing death the rate of previously convicted persons for violent offenses exceeded 30% (See (4) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2). In contrast to that, of those with previous convictions for violence offenses (25 persons) the repeat offense rate exceeded 50%, with the repeat offense rate involving a violent offense also being high at 40%.
Of those that had committed robbery the rate of previously convicted persons for property offenses exceeded 30% (See (4) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2), and as previously mentioned the repeat offense rate involving property offenses or a robbery was 25% and 8.3%, respectively, among all robbery offenders. Of those with previous convictions for robbery (28 persons) and those with three or more previous convictions for property offenses (52 persons) the repeat offense rate involving property offenses was over 50%, and that involving a robbery also exceeded 20% (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-7).
Examining their employment/residential status at the time of the index offense of robbery offenders revealed that the percentage of those unemployed was high at 60% and the percentage of those with unstable residence also exceeded 30% (See (3) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2). Examining their living status at the time of the robbery as the repeat offense revealed that nearly 80% were unemployed and over 60% had no stable residence (See (1) c. of Subsection 3, Section 3, Chapter 2). This then indicates their poor employment/residential status to be a significant factor for them to commit robbery. In addition, the repeat offense rate of those with gambling addition problems at the time of the index offense (49 persons, 13% of robbery offenders) was high at 16% (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-15), with nearly half of those who committed robbery as the repeat offense having the problem at the time of the repeat offense, thus indicating that it also was a factor for them to commit robbery.
By form of offense the repeat offense rate with robbery of those who had committed residential robbery as the index offense was high at 18% while that of those who had committed constructive robbery as the index offense was low (quite a few committed theft, etc. as the repeat offense, however, and the repeat offense rate was almost the same as that of all robbery offenders; See Fig. 7-2-3-2-5).
Of rape offenders the rate of previously convicted persons for sexual offenses, including forcible indecency, was 13% (See (4) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2). As previously mentioned the repeat offense rate with sexual offenses, including forcible indecency, of all rape offenders was 16% and that of those with previous convictions for sexual offenses including forcible indecency was 38%, thus indicating that those who repeated sexual offenses had a greater risk of further repeating sexual offenses.
In addition, nearly half all rape cases (number of reported cases in 2009) took place inside a residence (See Table 7-1-1-7) but the repeat offense rate with rape and that with sexual offenses, including forcible indecency, of those that committed rape by breaking into the residence of a non-acquaintance as the index offense was high at 23% and 30%, respectively.
Of rape offenders the percentage of those unemployed at the time of the index offense was low at 30% (See (3) of Subsection 2, Section 1, Chapter 2) and the unemployment rate at the time the repeat offense of those who committed rape as the repeat offense was also not very high (See (1) d. of Subsection 3, Section 3, Chapter 2). Stable employment status is therefore considered to have little meaning as a preventive factor with rape.
Similar to homicide the type of arson significantly differs with the differing motives, etc. The repeat offense rate with arson was high among those whose motive at the time of the index offense was a “desire to be imprisoned” (two of four persons) and those whose motive was “dissatisfaction/stress relief” (five of 35 persons) (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-2). Many of those who committed arson as the repeat offense lived solitary lives and felt a sense of being alienated, which was then considered to be part of the background for them to commit arson (See (1) e. of Subsection 3, Section 3, Chapter 2 and also Fig. 7-2-3-2-15).
Differing from other serious offenses the repeat offense rate of those who did not receive disciplinary punishment during their imprisonment for the index offense was not low (See Fig. 7-2-3-2-16) and the rate of repeat serious offenses of the same type (repeat offense rate with arson) of those released on parole was almost the same as that of those released on completion of their term of imprisonment. These results suggest determining the risk of a repeat offense by the individual offender to be difficult.