Proeve Michael J, Wolf Gabrielle
School of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Deakin Law School, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Aug 8;26(6):868-885. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2019.1642257. eCollection 2019.
Denunciation and general deterrence are major objectives of sentencing those who are convicted of possessing or distributing child exploitation material in Australia (CEM offenders), but courts also strive to achieve specific deterrence. To this end, courts tend to rely on professional reports as evidence of risk of reoffending and prospects for rehabilitation. After outlining matters that courts consider when sentencing CEM offenders, we discuss key empirical findings concerning CEM offenders' risk of recidivism, and then evaluate two approaches for assessing this risk: actuarial assessments; and structured professional judgment. We recommend that professional reports prepared for sentencing reflect current research findings regarding risk of recidivism amongst CEM offenders and that the structured professional judgment approach is used. We also recommend that matters which inform offenders' risk of recidivism and their prospects for rehabilitation be reported separately.
谴责和一般威慑是澳大利亚对那些被判持有或传播儿童剥削材料的人（儿童剥削材料犯罪者）量刑的主要目标，但法院也努力实现特殊威慑。为此，法院倾向于依靠专业报告作为再次犯罪风险和改造前景的证据。在概述法院对儿童剥削材料犯罪者量刑时考虑的事项后，我们讨论了关于儿童剥削材料犯罪者累犯风险的关键实证研究结果，然后评估了两种评估这种风险的方法：精算评估；以及结构化专业判断。我们建议，为量刑准备的专业报告应反映有关儿童剥削材料犯罪者累犯风险的当前研究结果，并采用结构化专业判断方法。我们还建议，应分别报告影响犯罪者累犯风险及其改造前景的事项。
