[1] The rationale behind this was that if a person was not a dangerous criminal, i.e. convicted murderer or other violent offender, that they should be allowed to have familial support, continue working, as well a receive aid from trained specialists, without being in prison.
[3] The practice then became firmly entrenched in the 1920s under a theory that crime was a pathology that could be diagnosed and treated like a disease; PSIRs were meant to expose the main reasons behind criminal acts by looking at the offenders history in light of forgiveness and understanding, and thus resulting in a positive change for the future.
This is important because many have seen this as suggestive of sentencing disparities or inequality in the treatment of offenders with a lower socioeconomic status or little to few ties to the community.
However, as Alarid and Montemayor (2010, p. 130) state, "The use of extralegal factors becomes especially important in that the PSIR identifies needs related to the defendant's criminal behavior for future treatment intervention services".
[citation needed] When a defendant is referred for a presentence investigation, the officer must immediately begin to gather the facts.
[citation needed] The probation officer's investigation of the offense usually begins with an examination of the complaint, information, or indictment charging the defendant and the docket describing the judicial history of the case.
The officer will use them to develop a brief chronological history of the prosecution of the case and identify the specific charges that resulted in the conviction.
This is usually accomplished by using databases maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), or state law enforcement agencies.
Additionally, the probation officer may request physical and mental health, educational, employment or financial records from a variety of sources to corroborate information provided by the offender.
The diverse interview settings that probation officers encounter require them to be proficient in a variety of questioning techniques.
The worksheet follows the format of the presentence report and provides space for recording data about the offense and the offender's characteristics and history.
Even though some of the data solicited from the offender during this interview may not appear in the final report, it is impossible at this stage to determine what information will be included.
The defendant's answers will determine follow up questions, items for further investigation or corroboration, and, ultimately, whether the data should be included in the report.
[citation needed] If the defendant impedes the probation officer's investigation, e.g. by failing to disclose all prior convictions and arrests, his sentence may be increased for obstruction of justice and failure to accept responsibility, even if the undisclosed information has no effect on his criminal history score.
It remains to be seen exactly how this applies to presentence investigation interviews, but it appears likely that a defendant who refuses to talk about his criminal history will jeopardize his sentence reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
Recently, the amount of time PSI's spend on personal background information has decreased in favor of facts concerning the criminal act.
The officer must be impartial and open to opposing perspective and must consider all relevant and reliable information before making an independent judgment about the tentative findings of fact and guideline applications that will be recommended to the court.
The probation officer must be prepared to report unresolved disputes to the court in a detached, dispassionate manner focusing on the factual or legal disagreement among the parties.
[citation needed] The officer then discloses the final report and sentencing recommendation to court through a mathematical system of allocating points.
The probation officer must then be prepared to discuss the case with the sentencing judge in chambers or in court, to answer questions about the report that arise during the sentencing hearing, and, ultimately, to testify under oath in open court as to the basis for the factual findings and guideline applications recommended in the report.
[citation needed] In the Federal System, after the offender's sentencing by the Court, the probation officer must ensure that copies of the pre-sentence report and other requested documents are forwarded to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and the U.S.
[1] The document has recently undergone several structural changes to become more of an unbiased law enforcement tool, and less of a broad overview of the defendant and their circumstances.