Abstract
The term “serious offenders” evokes thoughts of predatory offenders who engage in crime to appease their innate violent tendencies. Yet, Godfrey, Cox, and Farrall note that in England—prior to the 19th century—this class of offenders would have been referred to as “dangerous habitual criminals” (p. 1). Between 1853 and 1908, legislation passed in England marked a dramatic shift in the way in which the country dealt with these offenders. Mass transportation of convicts to Australia and the United States was replaced with a series of Acts that called for increased punishment and community supervision. Serious Offenders extends the authors’ earlier work in Criminal Lives, which charted persistent offending among a group of men and women from 1855 to 1940 in Crewe, England. Their new work, Godfrey and coauthors argue, goes beyond individual offending careers and life courses by looking at the combined effect of both of these with criminal justice legislation.
This book is divided into seven chapters. In Chapter 1, the authors chronicle prior research on serious habitual offenders from pre-1850 to the 21st century. Chapter 2 explains the research methodology used to collect data for this book. This section discusses data sources, case grouping, the construction of life grids, and ethical concerns with doing this type of research. Chapter 3 introduces the Acts that Godfrey, Cox, and Farrall argue shaped the criminal justice system’s response to and treatment of serious offenders: the penal acts, habitual offender legislation, and preventive detention. The goal of Chapter 4 is to estimate the number of habitual offenders engaged in criminal activity at the time the Acts were passed, and the actual amount of serious crime committed between 1860 and 1940.
Chapters 5–7 assess the relationship between offenders’ personal and social characteristics, the provisions of the habitual offender legislation, and serious offending. Specifically, Chapter 5 examines the life courses of the offenders included in the authors’ data set by looking at why criminals begin offending, why they continue to commit crime, and why some eventually desist. In Chapter 6, Godfrey et al. evaluate the effectiveness of the Acts, and the legislation’s impact on the criminal careers of serious offenders. In the book’s final chapter, the authors attempt to use their findings on habitual offender legislation to make recommendations for modern criminal justice policy makers.
Serious Offenders provides an exemplary analysis of habitual offending in England from the mid-18th to the mid-19th centuries. The authors’ painstaking attention to detail throughout the data collection process produced rather detailed offender life grids, which allow the reader to envision the offender’s criminal career path. For example, Arthur Wallace’s life grid—which spans from 1885 to 1940—tracks his employment, offending, terms of imprisonment, and marital status. Detailed police remarks and quotes from Wallace himself to police are also included. Equally impressive is the historical review of the legislative framework prior to the enactment of the habitual offender Acts, and their ability to estimate the number of serious offenders during this time period.
With a strong historical and quantitative analysis in place, the authors’ note their “aim … [is] to relate historical and modern criminological research in innovative ways” (p. 2). One way they attempt to achieve this goal is by examining Feely and Simon’s notion of the contemporary “New Penology” (p. 205). In the final chapter of their book, Godfrey et al. draw several parallels between England’s habitual offender legislation and the new penology of the 1970s. Both time periods saw efforts to control the growing number of criminals in society; less emphasis on rehabilitation; an increase in the use of incarceration; the rise of mandatory sentences; and, an attempt to manage offenders based on their threat level to society. While their ability to link these policies and time periods is admirable, the contributive value of this book is somewhat limited, at least from a policy standpoint. Their take home point—that tough sentencing practices and lengthy periods of incarceration are ineffective means to address serious offending—is something that criminologists have argued and supported with empirical evidence for quite some time now.
Be that as it may, Serious Offenders’ discussion of how provisions of the English legislation labeled and reproduced (rather than reduced) habitual offending may be of interest to constructionist theorists. Life course theorists may also find value in this book, though the authors note that since none of the offenders were actually interviewed, any casual explanations concerning life events and offending can only be inferred. In addition, those interested in historical criminology should find this book particularly interesting.