Advancing knowledge about residual criminal careers: A follow-up to age 56 from the Cambridge study in delinquent development

Highlights

• The residual length and frequency of criminal careers declines steadily with age.

• Residual criminal careers decline with increasing time since the last offense.

• Violent offenses are not associated with more active residual criminal careers.

• Risk scores predicted RNO more strongly than RCL.

• Not all features of prior criminal records may be predictive of future offending.

Abstract

Purpose

This study investigates criminal career parameters that are associated with residual career length (RCL) and residual number of offenses (RNO) across various periods of the life course.

Methods

Drawing on official data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development up to age 56, distributions of RCL and RNO are examined for various criminal career features: age, conviction number, time since the last conviction, age of onset, co-offending, and offense type.

Results

The residual number of years and offenses remaining in criminal careers declines steadily with age. Residual criminal careers decline with increasing time since the last offense; RCL and RNO display the most substantial declines after 5 years have elapsed since the last offense. The average RCL is the same for nonviolent and violent offenses, and the average RNO is lower for the latter. Risk scores predicted RNO more strongly than RCL.

Conclusions

Given the historically unprecedented number of individuals with a criminal record, and the resulting stigma and blocked access to employment and housing opportunities, residual criminal career research has important implications for reintegration efforts. Not all criminal records are equal. Evidence suggests that not all features of prior criminal records may be predictive of future offending.

Introduction

Residual criminal careers remain the least explored dimension of criminal careers (Blumstein, 2005). Residual career length (RCL) refers to the remaining number of years in criminal careers until the last offense, and residual number of offenses (RNO) is defined as the remaining number of offenses in criminal careers (Kazemian & Farrington, 2006). Knowledge about residual criminal careers remains limited, despite its crucial importance to criminal justice and various social policies.

From a theoretical viewpoint, RCL reflects the age-crime distributions of active offenders. For decades, criminologists have debated the interpretation of the age-crime curve, namely whether declines in the aggregate curve are driven by changes in prevalence (participation) or incidence (frequency) rates, or both. Although relatively few individuals remain active in offending after age 30, it remains unclear whether the number of years remaining in the criminal careers of those who do remain active decline precipitously with age (Blumstein, Cohen, & Hsieh, 1982). Estimates of RCL and RNO at each age can help to identify periods of the life course during which active offenders are most likely to cease offending, and periods when they are most likely to persist.

Research on residual criminal careers has particular relevance to three areas of decision-making: sentencing and incapacitation, parole and release, and social policies that impact the reintegration of individuals with a criminal record. First, at the sentencing stage, judges must decide whether the convicted individual is likely to pose a significant risk of future reoffending and if so, for how long? This assessment guides the decision to resort to incarceration, as well as the length of the prison sentence. While some sentencing guidelines may limit the discretionary power of judges, particularly in the American criminal justice system, in many cases judges have a great degree of discretion in their sentencing decisions.

Second, parole decisions also rely on assumptions about residual criminal careers, and discretionary release decisions are heavily influenced by assessments of the likelihood of future offending. In a perfect system, high-rate offenders would be incapacitated during periods of high-rate offending, and low-rate offenders would either be diverted to alternative sanctions, or serve limited time. Assuming that incapacitation and crime prevention are the main objectives of incarceration, there is little point in locking up individuals after they have ceased offending (Blumstein et al., 1982; Piquero, Brame, & Lynam, 2004).

Third, knowledge on residual criminal careers informs reentry practices, and enables us to better understand the value in imposing restrictions on individuals with a criminal record. For instance, many individuals with a criminal record are denied access to housing or employment based on the assumption that they are at risk of reoffending (National Research Council, 2014). However, we know that the existence of a criminal record alone is insufficient in predicting the level of risk posed by an individual. A host of factors must be considered in order to determine whether a criminal record constitutes an adequate predictor of the level of threat posed to the community. The most salient factors emerging from criminological research include age, time elapsed since the last conviction, the number of prior convictions, and the strength of the support network upon release (Kurlychek et al., 2006, Kurlychek et al., 2007; National Research Council, 2014). While we may never be able to perfectly predict risk of future offending, we also know that not all criminal records equate with high risk of reoffending, and some more recent policies have reflected this observation. For instance, in the United States, Ban the Box policies have required employers to delay questions about an applicant's criminal record in efforts to eliminate blanket bans against all individuals with a criminal history.

The current study provides a follow-up to Kazemian and Farrington's (2006) analysis of residual criminal careers. One of the rare studies that has examined offending patterns past midlife (Laub & Sampson, 2003) has suggested that findings about life-course and offending trends may be different when the observation period extends beyond age 40. The extended follow-up in the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development enables us to investigate whether criminal career patterns remain the same past midlife, a question that can only be tested with a handful of datasets in the field of Criminology. In a follow-up to age 56, we draw on several criminal career indicators (age, conviction number, time since the last conviction, age of onset, co-offending, and offense type) to assess whether the distributions of RCL and RNO remain similar over a longer observation period.