JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
Please note that UPSpace will be unavailable from Friday, 2 May at 18:00 (South African Time) until Sunday, 4 May at 20:00 due to scheduled system upgrades.
We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause and appreciate your understanding.
The significance of criminological pre-sentence evaluation reports for rehabilitation directives in custodial settings : sex offender docket analysis
Criminological pre-sentence evaluation reports assist courts by providing a comprehensive
picture of an offender as a human being; the factors that contributed to the crime; an explanation
of the offending behaviour, and also by recommending individualised sentencing options. In
corrections, criminologists compile expert needs and risk assessments to determine exclusive
pointers for offender rehabilitation efforts. It is thus assumed that criminological pre-sentence
evaluation reports, that are compiled before sentencing, should form, to some extent, the basis of
the criminological after-sentencing (offender needs and risk) reports. If this is the case, offenderspecific
and offence-specific factors, as outlined in the pre-sentence reports, can guide
correctional criminologists with the identification of offenders’ unique needs and risks for
rehabilitation submissions. This article draws attention to the plausible worth that criminological
pre-sentence reports hold for corrections. The aim is to establish if pre-sentence evaluation reports
hold any benefit or significance for the exposure of rehabilitation indicators in terms of offender
needs and risks. Four pre-sentence evaluation reports (document analysis) of adult sex offenders,
who committed the same type of offence, with the same category victim, were assessed to ascertain
the implication of the content of the reports for rehabilitation purposes. The researchers followed
a qualitative approach to analyse and assess the case studies presented in the reports.
Rehabilitation indicators in the reports were deliberated on and evaluated against what is
scientifically known to be applicable and effective for rehabilitation of this type of sex offender.
The findings indicate a void in correctional treatment targets (causes, motives, contributory
factors, influences, triggers, and high-risk situations) and a vacuum in an offender-specific and
offence-specific analysis. Aforementioned focus areas will contribute towards correctional
criminologists’ assessments in underlying rehabilitation directives for the adequate rehabilitation
and treatment of offenders.