The incest offenders vs. children have the fewest constituents with juvenile criminal records—a mere 7 per cent, a figure less than a third that of the prison group. About half of these juvenile delinquents had been convicted of offenses serious enough to warrant their being incarcerated for six months or more. This one-to-one ratio is unusually favorable: in most groups there is a larger proportion of serious juvenile acts. Some 2 per cent of the incest offenders vs. children had juvenile sex offenses on their records, a moderate number compared to other groups.
The average age of first conviction as an adult was 29 years—the third oldest age recorded, the other two incest groups ranking first and second. Nearly all other group averages fall in an age-span 20-25. Their average age at the first conviction resulting in a sentence of a year or more (i.e., the first conviction for a serious crime) was 33 years, again surpassed only by the other incest offenders.
Their involvement in antisocial behavior as revealed by their convictions (only a partial revelation at best) was rather belated: one fifth had been convicted by age twenty and three fifths by age thirty. This is, however, earlier than the other incest offenders. The total per capita convictions, about three, are moderate. However, the per capita sex-offense convictions are fairly small—1.6.
This small per capita sex-offense conviction figure accords with the fact that only 45 per cent of these offenders were convicted solely for sex offenses; this is a relatively small percentage, but not far removed from those of other groups. Their criminal record, aside from sex offenses, is not remarkable except for a large number (26 per cent) who were convicted of crimes vs. order—chiefly acts of foolish malice that could not be termed crimes against persons or property in the usual sense nor classed as disorderly conduct and vagrancy. Crimes vs. order are typical of all sex offenders.
The incest offenders vs. children had, of course, additional sex offenses. Most (32 per cent) involved willing females. Next in popularity were homosexual offenses, aggression offenses, and incest offenses against minors and adults—all, strangely enough, being equally common, each constituting 16 per cent of the sex offenses. There was little exhibition and no peeping. One is left with a feeling that those who committed other sex offenses were action oriented in the sense of seeking physical contact (hence the status of exhibition and peeping), and polymorphic in their quest, taking advantage of opportunities that came to hand. Daughters were convenient, willing unrelated females were next easiest to obtain, and in a pinch one could always force a female or turn to another male.
In terms of total criminal recidivism the incest offenders vs. children present a puzzling picture. What one could term a low-moderate number had one conviction (21 per cent), a relatively very large number had two convictions (29 per cent), a large number (nearly 20 per cent) had three, and another large number (29 per cent) had four to six. Obviously, extremely few had more. About all that one can say is that they were rather recidivistic in that many had more than one conviction, but not markedly recidivistic in that few had over six convictions.
*131\161\2*
