NCJ Number
99532
Journal
Justice Quarterly Volume: 2 Issue: 3 Dated: (September 1985) Pages: 429-438
Date Published
1985
Length
10 pages
Annotation
Interviews with 22 Federal probation officers and 30 white-collar offenders conducted during 1979 and 1980 revealed that most officers felt supervision was just 'going through the motions' because such offenders were not likely to commit new offenses and did not need help reintegrating into the community.
Abstract
Interview material was supplemented by data collected from the probation and parole files of approximately 80 white-collar offenders and by interviewed criminal justice professionals specializing in white-collar crime. The officers almost unanimously felt that it was highly unlikely that any of their white-collar clients would commit another offense while under supervision, implying that control -- one of the prime purposes of community supervision -was unnecessary. Interaction during the required meetings between probation officer and offender was described as restricted to pro forma exchanges of information and informal conversation. Probation officers have been taught that a primary purpose of community supervision is helping offenders adjust to the stigma of conviction and reenter the community. White-collar offenders usually have no readjustment difficulties because of their middle- and upper class backgrounds. These findings suggest that a probation sentence for white-collar offenders makes little sense. A more appropriate policy might be the use of a split sentence consisting of a short period of incarceration followed by a short period of probation. Over 20 references are provided.