Half way: desistance as a continuous variable

Although the former operationalisation of desistance is informative, as it was discussed in chapter 1, the process of moving away from crime could be better understood as not only the absence of criminal behaviour for a reasonably long period of time, but also as the presence of downward changes, such as de-escalation and deceleration across time (Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber and Ahonen, 2016; Loeber et al., 2012; Piquero, Hawkins and Kazemian, 2012; Le Blanc and Fréchete, 1989). These further changes are discussed below.

Changes in severity of crime from first to second wave

Unfortunately, not many studies contain specific data regarding the nature of the offences committed by individuals; these would have enabled scholars to assess de-escalation. As a result of that absence, research has instead been more oriented towards the study of deceleration (Piquero, Hawkins and Kazemian, 2012; Kazemian, Farrington and Le Blanc, 2009; Le Blanc, 2002; Loeber and Le Blanc, 1990). Nevertheless, it can be argued that there is relative agreement on the fact that, although a minority of offenders increase the severity of their offending in late adolescence, offenders generally show patterns of de-escalation during this period (Loeber et al., 2012).

De-escalation has primarily been defined as the decreasing severity of crime when two consecutive time periods of observation are compared (Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber and Ahonen, 2016). Mainly, scholars of criminology have used the seriousness rating score developed by Wolfgang et al. (1985) that divides offences into three levels of gravity: minor, moderate and serious.57 _The main disadvantages of this classification are that it puts offences of a dissimilar nature in the same category, does not necessarily match with the level of seriousness that the criminal offences have been assigned by the criminal justice system, and does not consider the perceptions of the individuals who commit the crime.

In order to address these limitations, I have constructed a measure of seriousness in which a score (1, 2 or 3) was assigned to each criminal offence from the list of all the offences included in the questionnaire, according to the seriousness in terms of the applicable conviction and the individual’s perception regarding the harm that the offences generate in society. The final score was obtained by creating an average from both scores.

57 _{For Wolfgang et al. (1985) minor delinquency consists of shoplifting, vandalism and fraud; moderate delinquency}

includes theft, gang fighting, carrying weapons and joyriding; and serious delinquency consists of car theft, strong- arming, selling drugs, breaking and entering, forced sex, homicide and assault.

Table 6 An operationalisation of the seriousness of criminal behaviour

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Criminal Code applicable

conviction Diversion Prison sentence for a maximum of 3 years Prison sentence for a maximum of 5 years

How much harm (specific criminal behaviour) generated to

society58

None Some A lot

In the first wave, each individual received a score (1, 2 or 3) according to the most serious criminal behaviour that they declared having committed in the last year; the same procedure was used for the second (results are displayed in Table 7). It appears that 31% of the individuals who were criminally active in the first wave (Persisters, 1st Wave) stopped committing crimes by the second wave. Additionally, while 39% of the individuals maintained, 28% decreased and only 2% increased the seriousness of their offences between the two waves.

Table 7 Changes in the seriousness of criminal behaviour between the two waves N Percentage

(%)

Desisted from crime by the 2nd wave 67 31

Decreased the level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 59 28 Maintained the same level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 83 39 Increased the level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 5 2

Total 214 100

If we examine the individuals who were categorised as persisters in the second wave (independently if they were desisters or persisters in the first wave), it can be observed that 43% of the persisters continued offending or resumed crime in a less serious category than before:59

58 _{This question was included in the questionnaire.}

59 _{In order to classify the level of seriousness of offending for the individuals who did not commit any crime during}

Table 8 Seriousness classification of persisters in the second wave N Percentage

(%) Maintained the same level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 104 54

Decreased the level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 84 43 Increased the level of seriousness by the 2nd wave 5 3

Total 193 100

It should be mentioned that, in the first wave, 94% of the individuals of the sample who were active in crime (persisters) were classified in the most serious category of offending (level 3). Thus, the low amount of individuals that increased the seriousness of their offences (only 3%) is partially explained by the fact that only 6% of the individuals had the possibility of escalating to a more serious level in the second wave.

Regarding those who decreased the seriousness of their offences, it is worth pointing out that just over half (51%) of them did it at a level of minor offences, such as thefts, misdemeanours, vandalism and threats. Finally, it was also observed that 12% of the individuals who persisted started taking part in antisocial behaviours that they had not previously been involved with – a phenomenon known as ‘displacement’ in the research of criminal careers. Interestingly, 68% of these behaviours were minor offences as well.

In order to interpret and properly understand the above, I explored – as part of the in-depth interviews with 35 juveniles– the circumstances and factors involved in the decrease of seriousness. Interestingly, the reasons varied among individuals: while some young offenders restricted their antisocial behaviour to avoid the risk of being caught or getting a tough sentence, others did so with less serious crimes in order to pass unnoticed in non-criminal settings; still others decreased the seriousness to avoid violence. Nevertheless, it was clear was that, independently of the reason they followed, for several individuals the decrease in the seriousness of their criminal behaviour was experienced as the first steps towards the process of crime abandonment.

Instrumental changes towards less serious crimes: what the interviewees said

Several interviewees (desisters and persisters) argued that, in periods during which they were criminally prolific, they reached a point at which they recognised they were risking too much, were under high surveillance by the police, and the judges were “sick” of them because of their frequent appearances in the courtroom. They spoke metaphorically of being a “bomb ready to explode”, or of their previous convictions and arrests weighing them down, making them too “heavy”. When they reached this tipping point, they used strategies such as decreasing the seriousness of their offences in order to fall off the police's radar for a while. Although desisting from crime in the long term was not their conscious purpose in this endeavour, the tactic triggered several unintended processes that – in some cases – opened the way for crime abandonment. For instance, since less serious crimes (such as theft and pickpocketing) are normally offences committed by individuals acting alone, those resorting to such crimes established a significant distance from their antisocial peers. Moreover, it was not unusual for individuals to rid themselves of the lifestyle associated with robberies – for instance, the use of drugs to help achieve an appropriate state of mind to commit the crimes and facilitate the use of violence. This finding is consistent with Ayer et al. (1999), who observed that de-escalation was correlated with a decline in antisocial interactions. Most importantly, while robberies generally imply the immediate seizure of cash assets, theft of items necessarily postpones the ultimate goal and gratification of the crime – accrual of wealth – since the items must first be sold. This thereby encourages individuals to dispel fantasies about 'easy money'.

Keeping criminal and conformity social settings

Demonstrating consistency with the findings of Haynie, Doogan and Soller (2014), the desisters from the sample argued that one of the main facilitators of change in their experience was that, even during times when they were very criminally active, they always kept social attachments in conformist settings. They socialised intermittently with a small cohort of friends from school, with a successful cousin who went to university, with neighbours who prospered in their business, or with a partner who was not involved in crime. Some individuals lived parallel lives, never disclosing their criminal behaviour to their families. This way of life was not easy to maintain, however, and several individuals stated that they lost significant pro-social attachments when their criminal behaviour was exposed. In order to avoid that eventuality, interviewees reported

restricting their criminal behaviour to less serious crimes that did not threaten their status in conventional settings. Some engaged in crimes that were more ‘accepted’ in their social environments, such as selling stolen goods. Others limited their behaviour to thefts: since they are committed during the day and conventional clothing is required in order to pass unnoticed, it was far more possible for them to deceive their family, friends and neighbours through the illusion of going to work. The above strategy has been called ‘circumscribed deviance’, a duality of lifestyle that allow individuals to maintain bonds in both criminal and conformity settings, and gain recognition and success on both sides (Glaser 1969; Nagin, Farrington and Moffitt, 1995).

When violence went too far

There were also cases in which individuals decreased the seriousness of their criminal activities when they began to realise that their use of violence was increasing, or that their methods of intimidation were going too far. Most of the time, this was triggered by a shocking event during a robbery in which they observed that the victims were terrified or in which they had threatened children, old people, pregnant ladies or – in one case – even a Catholic priest. Although they experienced this as a point at which they definitely crossed the boundary between crime and evil, and violated the code of honour, this realisation did not affect all interviewees in the same way. Some simply used justifications to preserve a sense of moral decency, arguing that violence was needed because it prevented something more dangerous occurring, while others found that this dissonance between values and behaviour opened the way for reflection. The following example illustrates the latter:

Interviewer (I): Was there any occasion in which you realised that you went too far? Francisco60_{: Yes… actually yes, once. We were robbing a mobile phone store… I saw a} lady sitting on the floor, she looked at me and started to cry… she had urinated. Immediately I said to my friends, “Okay, let’s go – we stop here, no more…” And after that I thought, "Fuck, she was so scared…” When I am working I transform myself, you wouldn’t have recognised me.

I: And what did you feel in that moment?

Francisco: Fuck… I looked at my gun and I thought, “Oh, this is the kind of person that I

am going to be at the end of all of this.” (Francisco, persister, age 20)

As mentioned before, Shapland and Bottoms (2011) have claimed that desistance involves a process of ‘active maturation’ in which individuals start thinking about their goals and ethical norms, reflecting on what sort of person they feel they should be. This kind of ethical reflection, described in Virtue Ethics Theory, stresses that individuals approach moral dilemmas not simply by considering the moral rule itself, but by their own dispositions and beliefs within a certain context. This is what may have happened in the above example, when the brutal nature of the experience encouraged Francisco to reflect upon more than the violent act itself. It was not so much the moral norm of 'using violence is bad' that resonated with him, but rather the recognition of himself as the individual who was actively perpetrating the violence (“this is the kind of person that I am going to be at the end of all of this”).

It is interesting to note that changes in the seriousness of crime are far beyond mere ‘indications’ of the emergence of desistance. Moving away from serious crimes may imply leaving violence behind, thus bringing an end to being the violent person so despised by the individual. Indeed, the avoidance of hurting others may trigger the restoration of social bonds and the reconstruction of a new sense of self. For individuals seeing themselves as ‘good thieves’, this provides a starting point from which they may be able to build a conformist identity when moving towards pro-social roles.

From a gender perspective, it has been argued that the use of violence when committing crimes is not just instrumental; it is also a way of expressing masculinity (Katz, 1988; Sparks, 1996; Jefferson, 2002; Messerschmidt, 2005). Accordingly, the abandonment of the use of violence might be interpreted as a way of exploring more adaptive forms of masculinity – or, in Mosher and Tomkins’ (1988:82) words, to learn “how to be a man – a mensch – without being a macho man”. As one of the interviewees pointed out:

“Now I'm more focussed, less impulsive, I avoid fights… I have evolved, I am responsible for my family and I have future projections”.

(Felipe, desister, age 20)

Nowadays, in capitalist societies (such as the Chilean society, which has strongly embraced capitalism in the last three decades) aggressiveness is not the only way of performing masculinity: pursuing a productive life and assuming gendered family roles through rationality and responsibility - “the power of reason” - are also expressions of hegemonic masculinities (Connell, 2005:164).

Changes in crime frequency from first to second wave

Another way to assess changes other than crime cessation is to analyse the frequency of crime (deceleration). To do that, individuals were asked (in both waves) how often they had committed crimes in the past year. This question was provided for each category of criminal offence that they reported. The answers’ categories given were: never, only once, a few times, several times and a lot of times. Using a similar procedure to that for assessing changes in crime seriousness, a matrix was created to calculate changes in crime frequency from one wave to the other.

Table 9 Changes in frequency matrix Second wave

First wave Never Only once A few times Several times A lot of times

Only once Desistance Maintain Increase Increase Increase

A few times Desistance Decrease Maintain Increase Increase

Several times Desistance Decrease Decrease Maintain Increase

A lot of times Desistance Decrease Decrease Decrease Maintain

Only 8% of the individuals who were criminally active in the first wave increased, while 28% maintained the frequency of their criminal behaviour. 31% stopped committing crimes completely, and 33% decreased the frequency of their offences. Out of second wave participants who persisted in crime, 36% continued committing crimes less often than in the first wave.

Table 10 Changes in crime frequency from first to second wave among active offenders in the first wave61

Category N Percentage Desistance 66 36% Decreased frequency 70 33% Maintained frequency 60 28% Increased frequency 18 8% Total 214 100%

The in-depth interviews demonstrated that, as with changes in seriousness, deceleration can be triggered by instrumental reasons such as the intention of disappearing from the police radar and decreasing the likelihood of being caught. Nevertheless, changes in crime frequency were related to – and often prompted by – more sophisticated factors as well, such as changes in the motives that trigger crime and resisting crime temptations.

Deceleration and the transition from ambition to need

Interviewees argued that their most prolific periods in terms of crime frequency coincided with times during which they were deeply engaged with consumerism. The excesses of a consumerist life obliged them to maintain a high frequency of criminal activity in order to financially sustain the lifestyle that they pursued, characterised by the acquisition of luxury goods to display power and to acquire social mobility. During these periods, their offending was almost compulsive, with individuals experiencing difficulties in curtailing it because their desire to consume relied on a promise of gratification that was never fulfilled. It has been argued that consumerism “remains seductive only as long as the desire stays ungratified” (Bauman, 2013:46), and in the long term in fact exacerbates the perception of relative deprivation (Young, 2007).

By contrast, during periods in which individuals experienced a deceleration of their criminal behaviour, their need for possessing and incorporating (in real and symbolic ways) material goods

such as drugs, clothes, cars and electronic devices decreased as well. They experienced a transition from ambition to need in which crime started to occur sporadically as a means to assure only economic survival. Axel, for example, was a prolific offender who committed around 20 robberies and burglaries per month, decreased them to an average of two per month in the year before the interview. When asking him why, he answered:

“Now I only commit crimes when I have no job and I need money for my daily survival, when I have to bring money home, to pay the bills and to eat. When you are in need, you have to forget about the law and do what you know how to do best.”

(Axel, persister, age 19)

Another interviewee, also indicated the same pattern of change:

“Before I committed crimes just out of ambition. I was addicted to money; money was a vice for me. Then, I started to commit crimes only when I needed to. I went out once a week, I made 80,000 pesos and I made this last the whole week or even the whole month. Before that, it was different. If I had 200,000 pesos, I wanted 400,000 and so on…”

(Yerko, desister, age 18)

Fromm (1979:90) defined this pattern of change as being a transition from a ‘characterological having’, which refers to a ‘passionate drive to retain and keep’, to an ‘existential having’, which indicates what one needs to survive and develop (such as food, shelter, education, health, and so on). This transition might be crucial for the desistance process, since, according to Fromm (1979), it is only by the abandonment of the characterological having that individuals can achieve self- realisation and develop a life project that gives direction and meaning to their existence. This is consistent with previous research, showing that during the transition from crime to conformity individuals engage in more utilitarian and less hedonistic activities (Kazemian and LeBlanc, 2004).

Resisting crime in the search for habitus

When trying to leave crime behind, most interviewees do not immediately begin to search for a job, a partner or a new place to live. Moreover, since crime was an exciting activity that most of them enjoyed, and was embedded in almost all the spheres of their lives, they knew that

abandoning it had several costs beyond purely economic constraints. Accordingly, aware of the temptation they were going to encounter, several interviewees simply started by decreasing the frequency of crime through avoiding certain types of people, places and situations that either trigger crime or are related to it.

Avoidance is a clever strategy to begin with,62 _{since it does not necessarily imply complete crime} cessation, and thus allows individuals to manage their ambivalent desires to desist. It is not as radical as saying ‘never again’, but instead is about trying to resist the temptations of crime until a point is reached at which a non-criminal life starts to be habitual. As one interviewee pointed out:

Alvaro: I never said, “Okay, now I will change.” I never proposed to myself such a thing.

I just said to myself, “I hope everything turns out for the best and I hope that I will have