Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment

This article explores existing underpinnings in the United States criminal justice system for post-conviction risk reduction measures in terrorism cases. The purpose of these measures is to reduce the risk of future criminality by those already convicted of violent extremist offenses, thereby prote...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Kelly Berkell
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Daniel Koehler 2017-12-01
Series:Journal for Deradicalization
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/131
_version_ 1819266031480209408
author Kelly Berkell
author_facet Kelly Berkell
author_sort Kelly Berkell
collection DOAJ
description This article explores existing underpinnings in the United States criminal justice system for post-conviction risk reduction measures in terrorism cases. The purpose of these measures is to reduce the risk of future criminality by those already convicted of violent extremist offenses, thereby protecting public safety while also benefiting individuals and communities. Specifically, integrating specialized risk and needs assessments into terrorism cases at sentencing and during the corrections process constitutes one possible risk reduction measure. When administered to individuals convicted of providing material support or other terrorism-related offenses, rigorous evaluations can supply courts with information significant for sentencing and, when appropriate, structuring individualized rehabilitation approaches. In addition to assessment tools, rehabilitation and reintegration programs constitute potential risk reduction measures. Risk reduction programs would supplement and enhance, not replace, existing correctional methods including incarceration and supervised release. The District of Minnesota federal court is pioneering a program of disengagement and deradicalization for terrorism defendants, and other courts likely will develop similar approaches. However, appropriate judicial bodies have yet to adopt proactive roles in developing national policy guidance in this area. This article aims to further the discussion of reducing recidivism risk in terrorism cases by clarifying the legal and technical issues that would require resolution as prerequisites for the consideration and potential development of post-conviction programming.
first_indexed 2024-12-23T20:54:48Z
format Article
id doaj.art-332d4e3d32a54c03a06a491419735743
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2363-9849
2363-9849
language deu
last_indexed 2024-12-23T20:54:48Z
publishDate 2017-12-01
publisher Daniel Koehler
record_format Article
series Journal for Deradicalization
spelling doaj.art-332d4e3d32a54c03a06a4914197357432022-12-21T17:31:33ZdeuDaniel KoehlerJournal for Deradicalization2363-98492363-98492017-12-01Winter13276341Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction EnvironmentKelly Berkell0John Jay College of Criminal JusticeThis article explores existing underpinnings in the United States criminal justice system for post-conviction risk reduction measures in terrorism cases. The purpose of these measures is to reduce the risk of future criminality by those already convicted of violent extremist offenses, thereby protecting public safety while also benefiting individuals and communities. Specifically, integrating specialized risk and needs assessments into terrorism cases at sentencing and during the corrections process constitutes one possible risk reduction measure. When administered to individuals convicted of providing material support or other terrorism-related offenses, rigorous evaluations can supply courts with information significant for sentencing and, when appropriate, structuring individualized rehabilitation approaches. In addition to assessment tools, rehabilitation and reintegration programs constitute potential risk reduction measures. Risk reduction programs would supplement and enhance, not replace, existing correctional methods including incarceration and supervised release. The District of Minnesota federal court is pioneering a program of disengagement and deradicalization for terrorism defendants, and other courts likely will develop similar approaches. However, appropriate judicial bodies have yet to adopt proactive roles in developing national policy guidance in this area. This article aims to further the discussion of reducing recidivism risk in terrorism cases by clarifying the legal and technical issues that would require resolution as prerequisites for the consideration and potential development of post-conviction programming.http://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/131Terrorist RecidivismDisengagementViolent ExtremismCountering Violent ExtremismCVE
spellingShingle Kelly Berkell
Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
Journal for Deradicalization
Terrorist Recidivism
Disengagement
Violent Extremism
Countering Violent Extremism
CVE
title Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
title_full Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
title_fullStr Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
title_full_unstemmed Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
title_short Risk Reduction in Terrorism Cases: Sentencing and the Post-Conviction Environment
title_sort risk reduction in terrorism cases sentencing and the post conviction environment
topic Terrorist Recidivism
Disengagement
Violent Extremism
Countering Violent Extremism
CVE
url http://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/131
work_keys_str_mv AT kellyberkell riskreductioninterrorismcasessentencingandthepostconvictionenvironment