All Edward Kacher asked was to turn the music down. After drinking beer with roommate Christopher Vasquez, he was ready to turn in. What he wasn't prepared for was Vasquez's vicious response. Rather than lower the volume, Vasquez threw Kacher to the floor and punched him repeatedly, leaving Kacher's face covered with blood and his left eye swollen to the size of a baseball. When police arrived, Vasquez blamed the beating on the Mafia. They did not believe him.
Charged with one count of second-degree assault, Vasquez, who already had a criminal record, entered an Alford, or "no contest," plea. His community corrections officer (CCO) recommended a prison term at the high end of the standard 13-to 17-month range. In addition, given the defendant's long history of assaultive behavior and his failure to prove himself amenable to treatment, the CCO asked the sentencing judge to order Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) as a condition of the one-year community placement term Vasquez would be required to serve following incarceration. The CCO believed MRT would "assist Mr. Vasquez in maybe being able to make better decisions for the future."
The sentencing court adopted the CCO's MRT recommendation. However, it departed upward from the standard prison term to impose an exceptional sentence. The court based its decision upon Vasquez's criminal history as reflected by what the court tallied as 15 misdemeanor "convictions for assault or relatedly disruptive and violent behavior." Vasquez appealed.
After a Court of Appeals commissioner affirmed the judgment and sentence, Vasquez moved to modify the commissioner's ruling. The Court granted de novo review.
Holding: The Court struck the MRT condition but affirmed the exceptional sentence. Pursuant to statute, the sentencing court could require participation in treatment or counseling services as a condition of community placement only if the therapy was "crime-related," i.e., directly related to the circumstances of the crime. The CCO's comments as to why Vasquez needed MRT suggested otherwise. Hence the condition could not stand.
The exceptional sentence, however, required affirmance unless it was "clearly erroneous" for lack of "substantial evidence" to support it. Even if the lower court erred as to the precise number of prior convictions- it clearly based its ruling on a "far-reaching history" of violent behavior for which substantial evidence existed.
| Kenneth D. Robinson, Ph.D. President Correctional Counseling, Inc. |
Drs. Robinson and Little comment: The State v. Vasquez case raises numerous ethical and moral issues for treatment providers and the criminal justice system. Lack of understanding by the legal system, supervising authorities and offenders of the goals and objectives of various treatment methodologies no doubt plays a role in legal challenges. To place clients in programs better suited to their needs, we advocate that jurisdictions each maintain a "menu of available treatment options" from which appropriate programs may be selected for offenders after adequate evaluations are performed.
The vast majority of offenders have a set of personality disorders that, by their nature, resist traditional treatment. While some professionals refer to this core of personality traits as "criminal personality," we prefer to utilize the diagnostic term Antisocial Personality Disorder.
In the 1970s and 1980s, we carefully tracked recidivism data on large numbers of offenders. Dismal outcomes led us to rethink everything we were doing with offenders in the name of treatment. We concluded that traditional counseling and available treatment approaches (including self-help groups) did not work on the core pathology common to most offenders: They think differently, have a set of values directly opposing society and are extremely hedonistic.
In 1986, Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) was developed to confront criminal thinking and behavior systematically. Its overriding goal has been the reduction of subsequent criminal behavior, as reflected in the successful completion of parole/probation, fewer rearrests and lower reincarceration rates.
MRT has 16 "steps" or modules, with prescribed tasks and homework assignments for each module completed outside of groups. In group sessions, participants present their work on each module sequentially, and the group facilitator uses objective criteria to evaluate whether the work meets passable standards.
All MRT facilitators throughout the U.S. have been certified in the method through a specialized 32-hour training course. The system was trademarked to ensure that those professionals who used MRT would have standardized training.
Since the initial development of MRT, separate program formats have been devised, with each format directly addressing specific types of offenders. These different MRT models were developed because of the remarkable beneficial changes in objective behavior we quickly found in MRT-treated offenders.
Washington State probation's basic MRT program primarily utilizes the model designed for criminal thinking, criminal values and criminal behavior. It addresses chemical usage, dishonesty, fundamental irresponsibility in relationships, how a person decides what is right or wrong, inappropriate goals, lack of trust, manipulation, violence and more. Washington State's staff also utilizes MRT models that focus on anger, domestic violence, juveniles and sex offenders.
MRT is not related to Alcoholics Anonymous. However, it can be completed in conjunction with any other treatments appropriate to an offender's needs. In our "menu of treatment options" idea, basic MRT is appropriate for changing the core of the criminal personality. However, some offenders need more intervention-and MRT is sophisticated enough to fit their observable needs.
Over 60 MRT outcome studies have now been published in professional literature. These studies report on rearrests, reincarcerations, and other objective, measurable outcome variables such as disciplinary infractions and urine test results. The cumulative total of MRT-treated offenders in these studies exceeds 20,000; non-MRT-treated offenders (comparison control groups) number over 65,000.
Reporting on post-treatment time periods of up to 10 years, the studies indicate a reduction in disciplinary rates, drug usage, rearrests and reincarceration after MRT treatment. They show that overall recidivism (reincarceration rates compared with control rates) is cut by between 30 and 60 percent during the five years following treatment, and by between 24 and 30 percent over a 6-to 10-year period.
