In the Netherlands, a pretrial forensic mental health report (FMHR) can be requested to inform the court whether a mental disorder was present at the time of the offense, whether this disorder... Show moreIn the Netherlands, a pretrial forensic mental health report (FMHR) can be requested to inform the court whether a mental disorder was present at the time of the offense, whether this disorder affected behaviour and decision-making at the time of the offense, how this disorder may affect future behaviour and advise on possible treatment measures. However, a substantial number of defendants refuse to cooperate with FMHRs to avoid being sentenced to a forensic psychiatric hospital for at least two years (TBS). With an experimental vignette study among law and criminology students (N = 355), we tested whether TBS is less likely for an uncooperative defendant than for a cooperative defendant. Second, we tested whether an uncooperative defendant receives a longer prison sentence when TBS is not imposed. Results showed that refusing to cooperate reduces the likelihood of a TBS measure and that this is compensated by a slightly longer prison sentence. Extending international research, we explored whether type of disorder and recidivism risk in an FMHR had an effect on sentencing. Results show that schizophrenia led to TBS more often than antisocial personality disorder regardless of recidivism risk. Type of disorder or recidivism risk did not substantially affect the prison sentence regardless of whether TBS had been imposed. Recommendations for research and practice are discussed. Show less
The Netherlands endorses a unique criminal record system in which every job applicant can request the government to provide a risk assessment determining whether he or she is fit for a given job,... Show moreThe Netherlands endorses a unique criminal record system in which every job applicant can request the government to provide a risk assessment determining whether he or she is fit for a given job, known as the Certificate of Conduct (CoC). Yet, little is known about how these state-conducted risk and assessments are made. To fill this gap, we systematically analysed all case law on CoCs published online since 2004. We found surprisingly low chances of successfully winning a CoC by appealing against its denial (1.6%). Moreover, although judges have ample room for discretion and individualised assessment, only exceptional personal circumstances may lead to a reversal of the denial. In particular, cases with only one offence committed a long time ago or involving a professional assessment stating a low recidivism risk. These findings indicate a strong focus on risk prevention, oftentimes favouring public protection above the individual’s rehabilitation and socio-economic interests. This puts due process at stake, especially since very few applicants (0.6%) appeal the denial of a CoC. Show less
Voor veel mensen met een lichamelijke of mentale functiebeperking is de wereld nog (gedeeltelijk) ontoegankelijk. De theorievorming over (on)toegankelijkheid helpt ons de vooruitgang van de... Show moreVoor veel mensen met een lichamelijke of mentale functiebeperking is de wereld nog (gedeeltelijk) ontoegankelijk. De theorievorming over (on)toegankelijkheid helpt ons de vooruitgang van de afgelopen jaren te verklaren, laat ons de vinger leggen op gebieden waar het nog schort aan toegankelijkheid en biedt oplossingen richting een maatschappij die voor iedereen te navigeren is. Deze oplossingen zullen net zo vaak te maken hebben met de fysieke wereld an sich, zoals de openbare ruimte, als met de prioriteiten en handelswijzen van de maatschappelijke instituties die de besluiten nemen over de fysieke wereld. Theorieën zoals kwetsbaarheidstheorie en de mogelijkhedenaanpak geven ons hiermee een blauwdruk om de verplichtingen uit het Verdrag inzake de rechten van personen met een handicap gestand te doen – in het bijzonder de wenken betreffende de toegankelijkheid van de fysieke wereld en de instituties die hierover beslissen. Show less
Pannebakker, E.S.; Pluut, H.; Voskamp, S.; Zanger, W. de 2021
A forensic mental health report is requested in about 30% of more serious cases presented to the criminal court. These reports can be used at sentencing and advise the judge on criminal... Show moreA forensic mental health report is requested in about 30% of more serious cases presented to the criminal court. These reports can be used at sentencing and advise the judge on criminal responsibility, recidivism risk, and possible treatment measures, but is not a formal factor in decisions about guilt. The current study focuses on the (unwarranted) effect of forensic mental health information on conviction decisions. Using an experimental vignette study among 155 criminology students, results show that when a mental disorder is present, conviction rates are higher than when such information is absent. In line with the story model of judicial decision-making, additional analyses showed that this effect was mediated by the evaluation of guilt rather than by the evaluation of other physical evidence. Implications for further research and practice are discussed. Show less
Huibers, M.; Kunst, M.; Wingerden, S.G.C. van 2019
The Violent Offences Compensation Fund’s decision-making practice: A qualitative study into the evaluation of requests for compensation Victims who suffer severe damages due to the act of a... Show moreThe Violent Offences Compensation Fund’s decision-making practice: A qualitative study into the evaluation of requests for compensation Victims who suffer severe damages due to the act of a violent crime can request state compensation from the Dutch Violent Offences Compensation Fund (VOCF). VOCF workers who decide on these requests use their discretionary powers to translate the VOCF’s rules and policy into concrete actions. This study investigated (1) to what extent these VOCF workers match Lipsky’s definition of street-level bureaucrats and (2) what routines and heuristics they use to deal with time and information constraints. On the basis of document analysis and interviews, we found that the decision makers of the VOCF can to a certain extent be seen as street-level bureaucrats. To make decisions timely, some of them use routines such as the ‘downstream orientation’. This means that they award requests for compensation if they think that the applicant would be able to successfully contest a rejecting decision. To deal with a lack of information, they sometimes include a review clause in the text of a rejection decision. The use of heuristics was not found among the lawyers who decide in first instance, but in case of appeal hearings heuristics such as the affect and representativeness heuristic seem to play a role in the decision-making process. Future research should investigate whether these routines and heuristics lead to disparities in outcomes. Show less
In deze Forumbijdrage reflecteren wij op het themanummer ‘Empirisch-juridisch onderzoek’ van Justitiële verkenningen (2016, nr. 6). Als rechtssociologen, werkend vanuit de Internationale Law &... Show moreIn deze Forumbijdrage reflecteren wij op het themanummer ‘Empirisch-juridisch onderzoek’ van Justitiële verkenningen (2016, nr. 6). Als rechtssociologen, werkend vanuit de Internationale Law & Society-traditie, hebben we met zeer grote interesse kennis genomen van het themanummer. De centrale boodschap in het nummer – het belang van empirisch onderzoek naar de werking van het recht en juridische instituties – onderschrijven we van harte. Echter, zoals wellicht valt te verwachten van een bijdrage in deze rubriek zien we ook ruimte voor kritische reflectie. Met die reflectie beogen wij de discussie over een sociaalwetenschappelijke bestudering van het recht te verdiepen én te verbreden. Show less
The degree to which individuals have confidence in the judiciary varies substantially. In this paper, we take the heterogeneity of the population as a starting-point. Our basic idea is that... Show moreThe degree to which individuals have confidence in the judiciary varies substantially. In this paper, we take the heterogeneity of the population as a starting-point. Our basic idea is that signals about the judiciary acquire significance through frames, schemes of interpretation. Using focus groups we portrayed contrasting frames of citizens. These frames enable us to test the consequences of measures to promote confidence. Measures that tend to increase confidence according to one frame may decrease confidence according to another. This yields dilemmas for those looking for possibilities to promote confidence. One possibility to deal with these dilemmas is to differentiate between different audiences. Show less
