An Actuarial Risk Assessment of Violence Posed by Capital Murder Defendants

Sorensen, Jonathan R.; Pilgrim, Rocky L.

doi:10.2307/1144202

Cited by 67 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The base rate of violence for the Sorensen and Pilgrim sample was approximately 24 per 1000 inmates per year (Sorensen and Pilgrim 2000), involving 8% of the inmates. This is notably lower than most of the research on capital inmates, which has ranged from 10% (Marquart et al 1994, p. 179) to 26% (Reidy et al 2001, p. 70).…”

Section: Sorensen and Pilgrim (2000) Actuarial Scalementioning

confidence: 97%

“…Based on aggregate incidence rates of violence committed within the Texas prison system, Sorensen and Pilgrim (2000) estimated the likelihood of violence perpetrated by those convicted of murder across 40 years in prison (the minimum length of imprisonment a non-death sentenced capital offender in Texas must serve before being eligible for parole) to be 0.164 (p. 1264). They examined the relationships of a variety of (a) personal characteristics (e. g., military service, gang membership, intellectual variables, sex, race, marital status, religion, age), (b) criminal history variables (e.g., number of arrests, convictions, juvenile confinement, adult prison confinement, total prior prison terms), and (c) offense-related information (e.g., number of victims, contemporaneous perpetration of other types of offenses, involvement of drugs/alcohol, county of conviction) to institutional violence for possible inclusion in their actuarial model.…”

Section: Sorensen and Pilgrim (2000) Actuarial Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Archival disciplinary infraction data were categorized into an a priori classification scheme of serious assaults, minor assaults (including minor contact assaults and nuisance assaults, such as throwing urine/feces or food), verbal assaults/threats, prison order offenses, and non-violent infractions. To allow direct comparison with previous research (Sorensen and Pilgrim 2000;Marquart and Sorensen 1988) and to remain consistent with the degree of harm that juries theoretically consider in determining whether an offender constitutes a continuing threat to society, definitions of infractions by levels of violence were as follows:…”

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few states (e.g., Texas) require juries to determine whether a capital defendant poses a "continuing threat to society," and others (e.g., Virginia) include it as one of several aggravating factors that may be advanced by the prosecution as grounds for imposing the death penalty. Yet, even when not explicitly at issue, research has shown that future dangerousness plays an integral role in jurors' decisions (Blume et al 2001), often to the neglect of more salient issues related to deservedness (Sorensen and Pilgrim 2000). This appears to be especially true when mental health testimony regarding violence risk is based on clinical opinion (Krauss and Lee 2003;Krauss and Sales 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Predicting Institutional Violence among Death Row Inmates: The Utility of the Sorensen and Pilgrim Model

Buffington-Vollum

Edens

Keilen³

2008

J Police Crim Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The (Sorensen and Pilgrim, An actuarial risk assessment of violence posed by capital murder defendants. J Crim Law Criminol 90: [1251][1252][1253][1254][1255][1256][1257][1258][1259][1260][1261][1262][1263][1264][1265][1266][1267][1268][1269][1270] 2000) actuarial model was developed to predict institutional violence among lifesentenced murderers. However, despite its presentation at capital sentencing, the model has not been validated on death row inmates specifically. This study examined the association between Sorensen and Pilgrim model scores and five types of institutional violence (serious assaults, minor assaults, verbal assault/threats, prison order offenses, and non-violent infractions) among a sample of 155 individuals who had been incarcerated on death row in Texas. Results revealed that risk scores performed better for non-violent infractions than for serious assaults, calling into question the utility of this measure for capital sentencing evaluations.

show abstract

Section: Sorensen and Pilgrim (2000) Actuarial Scalementioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Sorensen and Pilgrim (2000) Actuarial Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Predicting Institutional Violence among Death Row Inmates: The Utility of the Sorensen and Pilgrim Model

Buffington-Vollum

Edens

Keilen³

2008

J Police Crim Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cumulative 15-year prevalence rate of inmateon-inmate murder/manslaughter was 1.2%, and again did not significantly differ for the three groups. Institutional homicidal violence characterizes a very small fraction of the death row population (.012) (Sorensen & Wrinkle, 1996) and incarcerated murderers (.002) (Sorensen & Pilgrim, 2000), though these rates are higher than those observed in the general inmate population.…”

Section: Violence On Death Rowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Death row inmate characteristics, adjustment, and confinement: a critical review of the literature

Cunningham

Vigen

2002

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews and summarizes research on death row inmates. The contributions and weaknesses of death row demographic data, clinical studies, and research based on institutional records are critiqued. Our analysis shows that death row inmates are overwhelmingly male and disproportionately Southern. Racial representation remains controversial. Frequently death row inmates are intellectually limited and academically deficient. Histories of significant neurological insult are common, as are developmental histories of trauma, family disruption, and substance abuse. Rates of psychological disorder among death row inmates are high, with conditions of confinement appearing to precipitate or aggravate these disorders. Contrary to expectation, the extant research indicates that the majority of death row inmates do not exhibit violence in prison even in more open institutional settings. These findings have implications for forensic mental health sentencing evaluations, competent attorney representation, provision of mental health services, racial disparity in death sentences, death row security and confinement policies, and moral culpability considerations. Future research directions on death row populations are suggested.

show abstract

Sentencing Determinations in Death Penalty Cases

Cunningham¹,

Goldstein²

2003

Handbook of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book chapter provides a comprehensive discussion of psychological evaluations in death penalty cases. Current demographic data regarding death row is described. The history of how a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the modern era have shaped the parameters of death penalty sentencing is detailed. Ethical considerations are explored with particular attention to pitfalls unique to death penalty evaluations. These include participation in the death sentencing process, informed consent, and hazards of the team approach. Both conceptual frameworks and practical procedures for forensic assessments in capital cases are described. While various evaluations from pretrial to execution are considered, the primary emphasis is on sentencing assessments. Research findings that can inform evaluations of mitigation are outlined, including empirical data linking adverse developmental factors to violent criminal outcome. The methodology and statistical data important to reliable violence risk assessments at capital sentencing are described. Included are tables that summarize violence rates among capital offenders and murderers in prison, identification of common errors in capital risk assessments, and discussion of challenges to the application of group statistical data to these cases. The contributions of evaluating witness and teaching witness testimony at the sentencing phase proceedings are differentiated.

show abstract

An Actuarial Risk Assessment of Violence Posed by Capital Murder Defendants

Cited by 67 publications

References 0 publications

Predicting Institutional Violence among Death Row Inmates: The Utility of the Sorensen and Pilgrim Model

Predicting Institutional Violence among Death Row Inmates: The Utility of the Sorensen and Pilgrim Model

Death row inmate characteristics, adjustment, and confinement: a critical review of the literature

Sentencing Determinations in Death Penalty Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About