Escalation and deceleration of offending behaviours from adolescence to early adulthood

Relatively little longitudinal research is available in Australia to describe I the age/crime relationship in much detail, particularly patterns of offending occurring during the transition from adolescence to early adulthood. This paper addresses this issue using self-reported criminal involvement from a school-based sample, a group of socially disadvantaged individuals, and a group of officially identified offenders. The findings support the widespread research that rates of offending peak during adolescence, at which time offending is widespread, and that the criminal career is of relatively short duration. However, the results also demonstrate that the age/crime curve is not a unitary phenomenon. The type of offending behaviour being considered, the gender of the population, and the perpetrator's exposure to the criminal justice system contribute to the variability in the curve. In this study, the prevalence and mean level of overall offending for the total sample was higher during early adulthood than adolescence for vehicle offences and drug-use, rates of theft were similar in both periods, and vandalism and serious offending were lower. In addition, socially disadvantaged young people reported involvement in crime that peaked and desisted earlier in the life course compared to the school-based sample, and gender differences within these groups were also found. For the school-based sample, offending for females began and desisted earlier than for males, but within the at-risk group, the opposite was true. Implications for crime-prevention programming are discussed.

Delivering demons punishing wives: False imprisonment, exoricism and other matrimonial duties in a late 20th-century manslaughter case

This article provides an analysis of R v Vollmer and Others, Australia’s most famous ‘exorcism-manslaughter’ case, in which a woman, Joan Vollmer, underwent an ‘exorcism’ performed by four people, resulting in her death. We examine how taken-for-granted distinctions were collapsed during the resulting trial - distinctions between crime and punishment, exorcism and punishment, church and state, the past and the present, law and religion, reason and unreason and between a demon and a woman. We show how the defence argument for the reality of demonic possession normalized the bizarre, while simultaneously exoticizing the mundane or ‘traditional’ criminal case involving a husband defendant and a dead wife. The apparent assumption on the part of the police and the media that this case was bizarre serves to veil the fact of its relative ordinariness. A wife is killed, and the lethal punishing violence inflicted on her body downplayed, to be reinterpreted in the legal context as somehow a consequence of something she herself precipitated. Our analysis of the Vollmer case provides a novel perspective on that always intriguing conundrum of crime and punishment.