Adolescent Sex Offenders?

Adult Sex Offenders

& Age of Onset

1/3 to 1/2 began offending

In adolescence

(Prentky et al., 2000)

Juvenile Sex Offenders:
Age of Onset

Begin Offending Under Age 12

46%

(Burton, 2000)
 Rise and Fall of Juvenile Crime
1983 – 1992 Arrests
 Girls +85%

 Boys +50%

 Youth in juvenile facilities +41%

( Children’s Defense Fund, 1997)
 Rise of Juvenile Crime
1980 – 1994 Arrests

Violent crimes +64%

Murder +99%

(Butts & Travis, 2002)

Fall in Juvenile Violent Crime
Fell 6 years 1994 – 2000

(Butts & Travis, 2002)

 Decline in Juvenile Crime
Violent Crime

Murder, rape, robbery aggravated assault

-34%
Decline in Juvenile Crime
Arrests
1994 - 2000

Murder -68%
Robbery -51%
Burglary -33%
Rape -25%

(Butts & Travis, 2002)

Decline in Violent Crime
2000 Lowest in 20 years

(Butts & Travis, 2002)

Decline in Juvenile Crime

Largest of any age group

Increases in Juvenile Crime
Arrests
1994 – 2000

DUI +54%
Liquor Law Violations +33%
Drug Abuse +29%
(Butts & Travis, 2002)
Decline in Crime 2008
Violent Crime

1999-2008

Decreased 41%
Decline in Crime 2008
Property Crime

1999-2008

Decreased 32%
 Decline in Crime 2008
Decline in Rape & Sexual Assault

1999-2008

53%
Adolescents & Violent/Sexual Crime
 Age of Onset of Serious Violence

85% of those involved in serious violence by age

27 report that their 1st act occurred between 12
& 20

Peak age of onset 16

Almost no serious violence starts

< age 10 & > age 23
(Prentky 2002)
 Two Onset “Trajectories”
Childhood Onset
strong link between childhood factors
and persistent violence into adulthood

Juvenile Onset:
most violence begins in adolescence,
ends with the transition into adulthood
(Prentky, 2002)
 Onset of Sexual Offending

Incarcerated adolescents N

Onset < 12 48
Onset> 12 130
Offending < and > age 12 65

Seriousness & complexity of sexual acts more

severe for the continuous offenders
(Burton, 2000)
Chronic Juvenile Offenders
% of Offenders % of Crime

6.3% 52%

7.5% 61%

(Wolfgang’s 1958)
 Juvenile Crime

Offenders Crimes

8% 70%

(Beuhring, 2002; Howell, 1995;

Kelley et al., 1997)
 Genetic Contribution to Violent
Behavior

½ Variance in antisocial behavior

Due to genetic factors

( Beaver, 2008; Mason & Frick, 1994; Miles

& Carey, 1997; Rhee & Wald, 2002)
 Interaction of Genes and
Environment

Males with low MAOA activity allele

(specific gene)
+
Childhood maltreatment

Increased antisocial behavior

(Beaver, 2008)
 Genetic Contribution to Violent
Behavior

½ Variance in antisocial behavior

Due to genetic factors

( Beaver, 2008; Mason & Frick, 1994; Miles

& Carey, 1997; Rhee & Wald, 2002)
 Genetics & Environment

Interactive

(Rowe, 2002; Rutter, 2006; Walsh, 2002)

 Violence Delinquency Scale
 How many times past 12 months hurt someone
badly enough to require medical attention

 Used a weapon to get something from someone

 Took part in a group fight

(Beaver, 2008)
 Violent Adolescents
3 samples

Pretrial Assessment
Institutional Assessment
Assessment Before Release

(Lodewijks et al., 2010)

 Protective Factors
Adolescent Violent Offenders
 Prosocial involvement
 Strong social support
 Strong attachments & bonds
 Positive attitude towards intervention
and authority
 Strong commitment to school & work
 Resilient personality
(Lodewijks et al., 2010)
 Impact of Protective Factors
0 1 or more
Pretrial Assessment

High risk 40% 6%

Low risk 12 6

(Lodewijks et al., 2010)

 Impact of Protective Factors
Institutional Assessment
High risk 86 54
Low risk 44 13

Pre-Release
High risk 78 33
Low risk 38 3
(Lodewijks et al., 2010)
 Which Factors?
 Strong social support

 Strong attachments to prosocial adults

 Boundaries of
Developmentally Normative
Sexual Behavior
 Normal & Deviant Adolescent
Sexual Behavior

(Adapted from Dr. Robert Prentky &

Dr. William Friedrich)
 “Normal”
 Sexually explicit conversations with peers
 Obscenities and jokes within cultural norm
 Sexual innuendo, flirting and courtship
 Interest in erotica
 Solitary masturbation
 Hugging, kissing, holding hands
 Foreplay, (petting, making out, fondling)
 Mutual masturbation
 Sexual intercourse with consenting partner*
 Deviant Behaviors: Level 1
 High degree of sexual preoccupation and/or anxiety
 Frequent use of pornography or sex shows
 Indiscriminate sexual contact with multiple partners
 Sexually aggressive remarks/obscenities
 Sexual graffiti (especially sexually aggressive images)
 Embarrassment of others with sexual remarks or
innuendo
 Violation of others’ body space
 Pulling skirts up / pants down
 Peeping, exposing or frottage with known agemates
 Obscene gestures or “mooning”
 Deviant Level 1
 Red flags - may signal an abnormally high
degree of sexual preoccupation and/or
sexually aggressive impulses

 Some form of intervention may be

desirable
 Deviant Behaviors: Level 2
 Compulsive masturbation (especially public)
 Degradation/humiliation of self or others
with sexual overtones
 Attempting to expose others’ genitals
 Chronic preoccupation with sexually aggressive
pornography
 Sexually explicit conversation with young children
 Sexualized touching without permission
(grabbing, goosing)
 Sexually explicit threats (verbal or written)
 Obscene phone calls (voyeurism, exhibitionism, frottage)
 Deviant Level 2
 Indicate a high degree of sexual
preoccupation and/or deviant sexual
interests,

 Require intervention
 Deviant Behaviors: Level 3

 Genital touching without permission (e.g.

fondling)
 Sexual contact with significant age difference
(sexual abuse of children)
 Forced sexual contact (any assault having sexual
overtones)
 Forced penetration (vaginal or anal)
 Sexual contact with animals (bestiality)
 Genital injury to others
 Deviant Level 3
 Victim-involved sexual assault

 Require intervention
Risk Assessment
 Risk Assessment:
Impact of Working with Offenders
 N = 200 young offenders of all types
 Sentence = 2 years
 Data:
Presentence
Current offense
Previous convictions
One meeting
(Williams, unpublished)
 Risk Assessment:
Impact of Working with Offenders

 Data:
Original information
Experience of working with offenders
for previous years
(Williams, unpublished)
 Risk Assessment:
Impact of Working with Offenders

Outcome
 1st Evaluation
Moderate correlation with recidivism

 2nd Evaluation
No outcome with recidivism
(Williams, unpublished)
 JSORRAT

Doug Epperson
 Item 1
Number of Adjudications for Sexual
Offenses, including the Current
 One………………………………………0

 Two………………………………………1

 Three…………………………………….2

 Four or more…………………………….3
 Item 1
 Count the number of formal adjudications
for sexual offenses

 Include attempted sex offenses and

conspiracy

 Record the score and NOT the number of

adjudications
 Include all adjudications regardless of the
level of the sex offense (misdemeanor or
felony)

 The number of victims or number of

discrete events does not count – simply
count the number of adjudications
Number of Adjudications
& Recidivism
No. N Sex Recidivism

1 452 6.2%
2 118 26.3%
3 37 35.1%
4+ 29 41.4
(Epperson, 2005)
 Item 2
Number of Different Victims in Charged
Sex Offenses, Including Current

 One………………………………………..0

 Two………………………………………..1

 Three or more ……………………………2

 Item 2
 Count the number of different victims in
charged sex offenses including current

 Record the score, NOT the number of

victims

 For “hands-on” victims, count each distinct

victim in charged offenses
 Item 2
 For “hands-off” exposure offenses
involving groups, count only one victim for
each offense

 The number of events, charges or

adjudications do not count – only the
number of victims of charged sex offenses
 Item 2
 Do not count victims of self-reported or
alleged offenses that were not charged
 Number of Victims

No. N Recidivism
1 442 6.8%
2 116 24.1%
3 + 78 33.3%
(Epperson, 2005)
 Item 3
Length of Charged Sex Offending
History, Including the Current Charge
 Zero time (only one charge).……………..0

 0.01 to 5.99 months.………………………1

 6.00 to 11.99 months.……………………..2

 12 months or longer.………………………3
 Item 3
 Length of time in months between the date of
the first sexual offense CHARGE and the date
of the most recent sexual offense CHARGE

 8 months & 10 days = 8 months

 Count the number of full months between the

two charges
 Duration of Sex Offense History

Duration N Recidivism

0 months(1 charge) 416 5.3%

Up to 6 months 144 17.4%
6 to 12 months 27 37%
12 + 49 55.1%
 Persistence of Offending
1. Number of adjudications

3. Length of offending history

2. Number of different victims

 Factor 2: Antisocial Orientation
(Unwillingness or Inability to Follow Rules
12. Number of adjudications for non-sexual
offenses
11. Number of education time periods with
discipline problems
4. Commission of a charged sexual offense
while under court-ordered supervision
10. Placement in special education for any
reason
 Factor 3: Abuse History / Treatment
Needs
9. Number of officially documented physical
abuse incidents with JSO as victim
8. Number of officially documented “hands-on”

sexual abuse incidents with JSO as victim

7. Prior sexual offender specific treatment
failures
 Factor 4: Risk Taking ??
5. Commission of a charged, felony-level,
“hands-on” sexual offense in a public place
6. Use of deception or grooming in any charged
sexual offense
 Development Sample
Utah

All juvenile sex offenders adjudicated 1990-

1992
N = 636
 Development Sample
Utah
Baserates

Charges
Juvenile sexual recidivism 13.2%
Adult sexual recidivism 9.1
Anytime sexual recidivism 19. 8%
 Utah development Sample
Percent Juvenile Percent Adult
Score Sexual Recidivism Sexual Recidivism
0–2 1.0% 5.9%
3–4 6.6% 6.6%
5–7 24.3% 7.6%
8 – 11 43.1% 23.1%
12+ 81.8% 27.3%
 Results for Anytime Offending
Risk Level Score Anytime Percent
Recidivists Recidivism
Low 0–2 21/305 6.9

Moderate/Low 3–4 17/137 12.4

Moderate 5–7 33/107 30.8

Moderate/High 8 – 11 37/65 56.9

High 12+ 18/22 81.8

 Utah Validation Sample
N = 538 boys
N = 406 complete data
adjudicated sexual offense in 1996 or 1997

Juvenile sexual recidivism base rates

Total
sample: 12.8% (69/538)
Complete data sample: 12.3% (50/406)
 Utah Validation Sample
Recidivist
Score s/ Recidivism
Risk Level Range Selected Rate
1 0 1/65 1.5%
2 1-3 27/271 10.0%
3 4-7 25/137 18.2%
4 8+ 16/65 24.6%
 Iowa Validation Study
N = 366
Adjudicated 1998 – 2000

Baserate juvenile offending 7.1%

 Iowa Validation Sample

Sexual Recidivism Rates

Risk Total 12-months 24-months
Level Score Sample at Risk at Risk

1 0 -1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2 2–6 8.0% 11.1% 16.4%

3 7+ 17.9% 33.3% 50.0%

 Systemic changes between 1990-92 and
1996-97 and again between the mid
1990’s and early 2000’s in the way JSO’s
were charged, adjudicated, and managed
 Recent discussions with Utah JJS officials
confirms that beginning in about 1995
more minor offenses were charged and
processed through the juvenile court
 Iowa
 More plea bargaining down to avoid
registration and community notification
 Bjørkly, 2009
Table 2
Possible differences between characteristics of violence in Asperger’s
syndrome and psychopathy.
Asperger’s
Characteristic Psychopathy
Syndrome
Sensory reactivity Hypo Hyper
Interpersonal
Manipulative Naïve
communication
Typical violence Proactive Reactive

Reinforcement contingency Positive Negative

Relating to violence Denial Confession

“Findings from these comparisons indicated that there may be substantial
differences between the two diagnostic disorders regarding these five
criteria.”