Future Dangerousness Revisited

Abstract

One rationale used in the imposition of capital punishment is the potential future dangerousness of the most serious offenders. Most research in this area has focused on the postcommutation and postrelease behavior of formerly condemned offenders and found that the majority of them did not pose significant danger risks. The current study examined the prison infraction records of 1,005 Arizona inmates serving determinate, life, or death sentences. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression models indicated that inmates sentenced to death were more dangerous than noncondemned inmates were. This effect achieved modest statistical significance and withstood controls for demographic characteristics, offense severity and type, criminal history, and diagnostic measures. Overall, these findings suggest that condemned defendants may be more dangerous than others, a statement sharply discordant with the extant literature regarding the future dangerousness of capital defendants. Additional research employing different samples from different regions of the United States is needed.

Operationalizing risk: The influence of measurement choice on the prevalence and correlates of prison violence among incarcerated murderers

“…A variety of operational definitions had been used previously in studies of violent or assaultive misconduct in prison (Cunningham & Sorensen, 2006a;DeLisi & Munoz, 2003;Edens et al, 2005). The broadest measure included a range of rule violations that had the potential to result in a violent outcome.…”

“…Often these studies had compensated for low base rates of actual assaults by expanding the operational definition of "violence" or "aggression" (see DeLisi & Munoz, 2003). Such expanded definitions may include behaviors such as verbal belligerence, threats, self-mutilation, and property damage that, while relevant to institutional administration, are not of the highest predictive and preventative concern.…”

Violent criminals locked up: Examining the effect of incarceration on behavioral continuity

“…A variety of operational definitions have been used when assessing violent and assaultive misconduct (DeLisi & Munoz, 2003;Edens, Buffington-Vollum, Keilen, Roskamp, & Anthony, 2005). The most comprehensive definition includes a broad range of rule violations that have the potential to result in a violent outcome, what could best be termed "dangerous" rule violations.…”

The Cycle of Violence Behind Bars: Traumatization and Institutional Misconduct Among Juvenile Delinquents in Confinement

“…Beyond these offender-based variables, there is also considerable evidence that various forms of violence, abuse, depravity, and suffering that occur in early life environments engender maladaptive and antisocial behaviors across contexts including periods of confinement (Farrington & Welsh, 2007;DeLisi & Muñoz, 2003;Gover, 2004;Maas, Herrenkohl, & Sousa, 2008;McCord, 1991;Patterson, 1982;Teague, Mazerolle, Legosz, & Sanderson, 2008;Wright, Tibbetts, & Daigle, 2008). Indeed, environmental exposure to violence figures directly or indirectly in many theoretical explanations of crime including social learning, cultural deviance, general strain, differential oppression, and self-control.…”