NCJ Number
44423
Date Published
1976
Length
10 pages
Annotation
THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE CONNECTICUT BOARD OF PAROLE ARRIVES AT ITS DECISIONS IS EXAMINED IN A STUDY OF THE COMPETING AIMS OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND PUBLIC ORDER.
Abstract
THE 10 MEMBERS OF THE CONNECTICUT BOARD OF PAROLE ARE APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEGISLATURE. NO PARTICULAR QUALIFICATIONS OR SKILLS ARE REQUIRED FOR BOARD MEMBERSHIP. THE BOARD HEARS INDIVIDUAL CASES AND MAKES THE FINAL DETERMINATION ON RELEASE DATAS. ANALYSIS OF THE BOARD'S DECISIONMAKING PROCESS OVER A 2-MONTH PERIOD SUGGESTS THAT PROBLEMS IN EVALUATING THE INSTITUTIONAL BEHAVIOR AND PSYCHOLOGICAL STATUS OF OFFENDERS, IN PREDICTING PUBLIC REACTION, AND IN ATTEMPTING TO EQUALIZE SENTENCE DISPARITIES LIMIT THE BOARD'S EFFORTS TO RECONCILE THE GOALS OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND PUBLIC ORDER. IT IS NOTED THAT MUCH OF THE CRITICISM OF PAROLE STEMS FROM RECOGNITION OF THE SHORTCOMINGS OF REHABILITATION AS A CORRECTIONAL GOAL. HOWEVER, THE CRITICISM IS INTENSIFIED BY THE MANNER IN WHICH PAROLE BOARDS EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETIONARY POWER. THE CONNECTICUT EXPERIENCE ILLUSTRATES THE IMPEDIMENTS TO RATIONAL AND EQUITABLE DECISIONMAKING BY PAROLE BOARDS. PAROLE BOARDS ARE HAMPERED BY VAGUE STATUTORY CRITERIA AND BY THE LACK OF SCIENTIFIC MEASURES OF REHABILITATION. UNTIL THE BOARDS ARE RECOGNIZED BY STATUTE AS HAVING FUNCTIONS OTHER THAN SENTENCE REVIEW, THEY PROBABLY WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE BOTH THE OFFENDER AND SOCIETY INADEQUATELY.