Perspectives on Serious Offending – An International Discussion on Justice, Reform, and Responsibility

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | TuneIn | RSS

On 17th June 2025, IN-CJ and the Probation Institute co-hosted an international webinar exploring some of the most pressing questions in criminal justice: how do we understand serious offending, how should probation systems respond, and what kind of reform is truly needed? The event brought together experts from France, the United Kingdom, and the United States to share insights shaped by research, inspection, and frontline experience. Their reflections are now available in a podcast edition of the session.

Professor Martine Herzog-Evans, a criminologist from Université de Reims, offered a comparative view from France, especially in relation to domestic violence and coercive control. She highlighted the growing awareness of these issues across Europe but cautioned that criminal justice responses remain inadequate — and, in many cases, harmful. She described a justice system still reliant on bureaucratic and legalistic models that fail to meet victims’ needs or prevent repeated harm. Her contribution called for trauma-informed, evidence-based interventions and warned against populist tendencies that risk further entrenching punitive, ineffective practices.

Professor Faye S. Taxman, a leading criminologist at George Mason University, turned attention to the limitations of how we assess and supervise individuals with violent behaviours. She argued that traditional risk and need assessments routinely miss patterns of violence, focusing instead on static or generic markers. Violence, she contended, is not always offence-specific and should be treated as a behavioural issue rather than merely a legal classification. Taxman called for supervision practices that focus on individual triggers, relational dynamics, and situational responses — particularly beyond substance misuse — to more effectively address violent tendencies.

Martin Jones CBE, Chief Inspector of Probation for England and Wales, gave a candid summary of recent inspection outcomes. Since taking office in March 2024, he noted that every adult Probation Delivery Unit inspected has been rated either “inadequate” or “requires improvement.” This troubling consistency reflects a significant decline in the quality of public protection work, driven by deficits in staffing, resources, and system coherence. Yet, Jones pointed to the contrasting success of youth justice services — many of which continue to perform well — as an indication that reform is possible. His remarks emphasised the need for systemic rethinking, particularly in the context of any future sentencing review.

Shared Reflections and Conclusions

While each speaker addressed a distinct dimension of serious offending, several key themes emerged. First, the importance of moving beyond system preservation toward meaningful reform — one that embraces complexity and builds capacity for relational, trauma-informed approaches. Second, the need to challenge the over-reliance on risk management tools and instead centre human behaviour, context, and motivation. And third, the recognition that international comparisons can both expose blind spots and inspire change.

This conversation does not pretend to offer a single solution to the challenges facing probation and justice systems today. Rather, it opens up a space for deeper reflection, critical questioning, and collaborative learning. We invite listeners to engage with the full discussion via the podcast, and to consider how these insights might inform their own practice or policy thinking.

Perspectives on Serious Offending and Justice Reform

How should probation and justice systems respond to serious further offences, and what can be learned from international perspectives? These questions were the focus of an IN-CJ and Probation Institute webinar that brought together Professor Martine Herzog-Evans (France), Professor Faye Taxman (USA), and Martin Jones (Chief Inspector of Probation for England and Wales), chaired by John Scott.

Herzog-Evans shared insights from her research on domestic violence and dangerousness in France, emphasising the complexity of defining risk and prosecutorial decision-making. She argued that legal frameworks often fail to capture the dynamics of coercive control and relational violence, which requires more nuanced approaches than current risk tools allow. She also highlighted the need for ongoing professional development for probation staff to address the changing nature of violent offending.

Taxman contrasted the US context, describing how probation supervision models struggle to deal effectively with serious violence. She pointed out that most risk assessment tools were designed to predict general recidivism, not violent or aggressive acts, limiting their usefulness. She argued for differentiated responses and evidence-based strategies tailored to individuals, alongside stronger integration of behavioural health services into probation practice.

Jones reflected on findings from inspections in England and Wales, including reviews of Serious Further Offences (SFOs). He noted that systemic challenges—staff shortages, rising caseloads, and weak multi-agency coordination—often undermine the ability of probation officers to manage high-risk individuals. He cautioned against political and populist responses that prioritise punishment over rehabilitation, stressing instead the importance of investment in staff training, supervision, and multi-agency partnerships.

The panel agreed that serious offending requires balanced responses: protecting the public while avoiding overly punitive measures that can entrench harm. They highlighted the importance of international learning, acknowledging that while contexts differ, probation services everywhere face similar pressures of resources, risk management, and public expectations. The webinar concluded with a call for stronger professional frameworks, improved training, and more collaborative systems that recognise the human complexity behind serious offences.