Monday, 06 April 2020

Chi Siamo
A Chi Serve
Formazione Professionale
Seminari e Convegni
TABBY in internet
TABBY trip in EU
Open Eyes-Safenet Use
Earn in Jvo
EAPL Sorrento 2009
ALBA Agenda Antistalking
ASTRA Sportello Antistalking
Valutazione del rischio
ISA Online
ISA-Increasing Self Awareness
Forze dell'Ordine
AMBRA - Ambasciatori di aiuto
RITA - Risposte di intervento
BODA-Believes on domestic abuse
Relazioni libere Dalla Violenza
Key Notes Print E-mail




2nd September 16:30-18:00 

Ernesto Savona


is professor of Criminology at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan since 2003. He is also Director of TRANSCRIME, Joint Research Centre of the Università degli Studi di Trento and the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore and coordinator of the International Ph.D. Programme in Criminology of the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in cooperation with other Italian and foreign Universities.
From 1986 to 2002 he was professor of Criminology at the Faculty of Law at the Università degli Studi di Trento. From 1971 to 1986 he was associate professor at the Faculty of Statistical Sciences at the Università “La Sapienza” in Rome.
President of the European Society of Criminology for the years 2003/2004. in 2003 he was appointed Editor in Chief of the European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, an international refereed Journal published by Springer.
A large part of Professor Savona’s research activity is represented by research at TRANSCRIME, which can be viewed in detail at

His key-note is on:  Zooming crime: situational prevention between macro and micro approach

Mapping opportunities for crime is the first step for reducing them. The problem is the degree of precision in answering to many questions: what crime? Where has it been committed and when? In this perspective the answer to who is the author is quite marginal. More relevant is to know who is  the victim/target and the conditions that produce opportunities for crime.
The more we can focus on the situational elements that characterise crime: place, modus operandi, victim/target, guardian, the more we are capable to tailor prevention measures. This focus, as in a zoom lens, starts on an aggregate level (macro) and ends on a micro level. Those who are in favour of macro level analysis like to discuss macro theories related to social exclusion, distribution of income, age, social control. Those who are in favour of micro level analysis like to understand and explain different dynamics related to crime, inferring that micro variables are related to the place where the crime is committed.
Both approaches are useful because, if we need generalisations, we also need to understand what happens in the details of crime, going beyond crime typologies and moving to the single action committed by the criminal.
Any kind of crime could be analysed and explained at macro and micro level: violent and appropriative as well as organised and economic.  When the analysis goes to micro these categories don’t work. We need to distinguish which particular crime (homicide, robbery, human trafficking, fraud), which victim (woman, bank, migrants, health system), which author, which modus operandi.
The author will discuss these two approaches showing the continuity between the macro and the micro level and their utility in understanding, explaining and finding appropriate instruments for preventing crime. Benefit for victims and social cost of crime in general will be reduced.

Salvatore Siena


Salvatore Siena, 58 years, joined the Italian National Police in 1975 as Commissario di P.S. . In 1993, he was promoted to the rank of Primo Dirigente .
From 1999 to 2004 he was Director of the Police Academy  entrusted with the training of new cadets in Senigallia.
Since 2004 he has been serving in the Scuola di Perfezionamento per le Forze di Polizia , Rome, where he performs the duties of CEPOL National Contact Person for Italy, being the head of the Unità Nazionale CEPOL.
In 2008 he was Chair of CEPOL’s Training and Research Committee.
In the period 2001-2003, he participated in some international missions in the Balkan area, where he was fully committed to co-operate with national authorities in order to update the police academies of the countries concerned. In particular, he worked in Albania, Bosnia-Erzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro.
In 1974, he graduated in Law from the University of Rome.
In 1985 he passed the relevant qualifying exam as a lawyer.
In 2001 he obtained an advanced university diploma in “Training Trainers” from the “Ca’ Foscari” University, Venice.

His key-note is on: A practical example of integration of disciplines in training the police: The Cepol

CEPOL was initially founded by Council Decision 200/820/JHA of 22 December 2000 as a body financed directly by the Member States of the European Union and functioned as a network, by bringing together the national training institutes in the Member States, whose tasks include the training of senior police officers.
CEPOL was later established as an Agency of the European Union by Council Regulation No. 2005/681/JHA of 20 September 2005.
CEPOL’s main function is to support the training of senior police officers of the Member States by optimising cooperation between the national training institutes. CEPOL therefore supports and develops a European approach to the main problems facing Member States in the fight against crime, crime prevention, and the maintenance of law and order and public security, in particular the cross-border dimension of those problems.
CEPOL still operates as a network with the training activities – courses, seminars, conferences - implemented in and by Member States. CEPOL, inter alia, organises between 80-100 training activities per year on key topics relevant to police forces in Europe; carries out specialised projects such as the CEPOL/Agis Exchange Programme and Euromed Police II project; creates Common Curricula relevant to all Member States.
In 2008, over 2000 senior police officers attended CEPOL activities and more than 750 experts, lecturers and trainers contributed to CEPOL activities.
A number of the courses and activities have become part of a continuing theme in the CEPOL annual training programme; others are short term, aimed at meeting  emerging needs.
Some topics are already indicated, either directly or indirectly, in the EU Decision establishing CEPOL, notably in those EU articles concerning CEPOL’s objectives and tasks. Furthermore, the annual training programme takes into account suggestions and priorities coming from different sources such as the Member States, the European Commission, Europol, the Task Force of the Chiefs of Police, the COSPOL Project or the OCTA Report and attempts to merge them in a harmonized context.

3rd September 10:00-11:00

Raymond Bull


Ray Bull is Professor of Forensic Psychology at the University of Leicester.  His major research topic is investigative interviewing.  In July 2008 Ray received from the European Association of Psychology and Law an ‘Award for Life-time Contribution to Psychology and Law’.  In June 2008 he received from the British Psychological Society the ‘Award for Distinguished Contributions to Academic Knowledge in Forensic Psychology’.  In 2005 he received a Commendation from the London Metropolitan Police for “Innovation and professionalism whilst assisting a complex rape investigation”.
In 2004 he was commissioned by the Scottish Executive to draft guidance on the taking of evidence on commission.  He was part of the small team commissioned by the Home Office in 2000 to write the 2002 government document Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance for Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses, Including Children (ABE).  In 2002/3 he led the small team commissioned by government to produce an extensive training pack relating to ABE.  In 1991 he was commissioned by the Home Office (together with a Law Professor) to write the first working draft of the Memorandum of Good Practice on Video Recorded Interviews with Child Witnesses for Criminal Proceedings
He has advised a large number of police forces in several countries on the interviewing of witnesses and of suspects, and he has testified as an expert witness in a considerable number of trials.
He has authored and co-authored a large number of papers in quality research journals and has co-authored and co-edited many books including Investigative Interviewing: Psychology and Practice (1999 – a second edition is now being written) and Witness Identification in Criminal Cases (2008).  He has been an invited speaker at a variety of meetings around the world.  In recognition of the quality and extent of his research publications he was in 1995 awarded a higher doctorate (Doctor of Science).  

His key-note is on: What really works in interviewing suspect by police:

In many countries the traditional way that police officers have interviewed/interrogated those whom they suspect of having been involved in serious wrong-doing has involved a 'pressurising' or an 'oppressive' approach. However, research with offenders in three countries suggests that some of them are more likely to provide valid accounts to the police if they are interviewed in a 'humanitarian' way. This presentation will describe the major change in the way that police officers are trained to interview in England so as 'to seek the truth' rather than 'to gain confessions'. The presentation will describing recent research (based on real-life audio-taped police interviews with suspects in England) which demonstrates that good (humanitarian) interviewing skills are related to more cooperation and responsiveness and to less reactance from suspects.

4th September 10:00-11:00

 Stefan Bogaerts

Stefan Bogaerts is a full professor in Forensic Psychology at the department of Law at the Catholic University of Louvain (Belgium) and at the department of Social Science and Law at the Tilburg University (The Netherlands). He is also a senior consultant research and treatment at  de Waag’, Centre of Clinical Psychiatry in the Netherlands. Currently he is involved in clinical and pre-clinical studies and has published several international articles on relational attitudes and personality disorders among sexual offenders, offense chains, self regulation pathways, deception and forensic social networks. From a theoretical view he studies the relationship between forensic psychology and (institutional) victimology, more in particularly the causes of job related violence and victimization.

His key note is on Forensic Social Network Analysis as an alternate way of approaching risk management of (sexual) offenders:

Outpatient supervision and aftercare of (sexual) offenders have be based on working mechanisms, such as adequate case management, professional risk assessment and forensic expertise, (electronic) monitoring of the behaviour, exchange and supplying up-to-date information about the offender and the involvement of the social context and the networks. There is few empirical support for the effectiveness of aftercare and outpatient programmes of (sexual) offenders. Forensic Social Network Analysis (FSNA) is an instrument to estimate the relationship between personal networks of forensic psychiatric patients and the risk and severity of recidivism. The FSNA method considers the specific social, cultural and relational circumstances of each individual patient, and defines both negative and positive influences on future behaviour. FSNA is an alternate method of approaching risk management of (sexual) offenders in the community by using information about the personality of the patient and information about the social context. FSNA can be used in combination with therapy, electronic supervision and monitoring.

4th September 14:00-15:00

David Farrington


David P. Farrington, O.B.E., is Professor of Psychological Criminology at the Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University, and Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, University of Pittsburgh.  He is a Fellow of the British Academy, of the Academy of Medical Sciences, of the British Psychological Society and of the American Society of Criminology, and an Honorary Life Member of the British Society of Criminology and of the Division of Forensic Psychology of the British Psychological society.  He is co-chair of the U.S. National Institute of Justice Study Group on Transitions from Delinquency to Adult Offending, a member of the Board of Directors of the International Observatory on Violence in Schools, a member of the Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group Steering Committee, a member of the Board of Directors of the International Society of Criminology, joint editor the journal Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, and a member of the editorial boards of 15 other journals.  He has been President of the American Society of Criminology (the first person from outside North America to be elected to this office), President of the European Association of Psychology and Law, President of the British Society of Criminology, President of the Academy of Experimental Criminology, Chair of the Division of Forensic Psychology of the British Psychological Society, Vice-Chair of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Panel on Violence, Co-chair of the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Study Groups on Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders and on Very Young Offenders, Co-Chair of the Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice Group, Chair of the U.K. Department of Health Advisory Committee for the National Programme on Forensic Mental Health, Chair of the Board of Examiners in Forensic Psychology of the British Psychological Society, Co-chair of the High Security Psychiatric Services Commissioning Board (U.K. Department of Health) Network on Primary Prevention of Adult Antisocial Behaviour, Acting Director of the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology, a member of the jury for the Stockholm Prize in Criminology, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Committee on Law and Justice, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Panel on Criminal Career Research, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Committee on Assessing the Research Programme of the National Institute of Justice, Visiting Fellow at the U.S. National Institute of Justice, Visiting Fellow at the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Criminality and Law Enforcement, editor of Cambridge Studies in Criminology and a member of the National Parole Board for England and Wales.  He has received B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in psychology from Cambridge University, the Sellin-Glueck Award of the American Society of Criminology for international contributions to criminology, the Sutherland Award of the American Society of Criminology for outstanding contributions to criminology, the Joan McCord Award of the Academy of Experimental Criminology, the Beccaria Gold Medal of the Criminology Society of German-Speaking Countries, the Senior Prize of the British Psychological Society Division of Forensic Psychology, the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Outstanding Contributions Award and the Hermann Mannheim Prize of the International Centre for Comparative Criminology.  His major research interest is in developmental criminology, and he is Director of the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, which is a prospective longitudinal survey of over 400 London males from age 8 to age 48.  He is also co-Investigator of the Pittsburgh Youth Study, which is a prospective longitudinal study of over 1,500 Pittsburgh males from age 7 to age 30.  In addition to over 450 published papers and chapters on criminological and psychological topics, he has published over 60 books, monographs and government publications, one of which (Understanding and Controlling Crime, 1986) won the prize for distinguished scholarship of the American Sociological Association Criminology Section.

His key-note is on: Risk factors and the development of violence from childhood to adulthood:

In the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, 400 London males have been followed up from age 8 to age 48. Of those who were still alive, 93% were interviewed at age 48. 17% of the males were convicted of violence. Interview data about violence were collected at ages 14, 18, 32 and 48. This paper reports on the continuity of violence from adolescence to adulthood and on childhood risk factors (measured at age 8) for violence convictions at age 31-50, self-reported violence at age 48, and partner violence (reported by the female partner) at age 48.

 5th September 10:00-11:00

Raymond Corrado

Dr. Raymond R. Corrado is a full-professor in the School of Criminology and the Department of Psychology at Simon Fraser University. He also is a Visiting Fellow at Clare Hall College and the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge and a founding member of the Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute at Simon Fraser University. Dr. Corrado also is a co-Director of the BC Centre for Social Responsibility and recently was the former Director of the Centre for Addictions Research British Columbia, SFU Site.  Dr. Corrado has co-authored five edited books including, Multi-Problem Violent Youth; Issues in Juvenile Justice; Evaluation and Criminal Justice Policy; and Juvenile Justice in Canada, as well as having published over 100 articles and book chapters on a wide variety policy issues, including juvenile justice, violent young offenders, mental health, adolescent psychopathy, Aboriginal victimization, and terrorism. Currently, Dr. Corrado is working on a number of research projects involving gaming issues, Aboriginal issues, and incarcerated serious and violent young offenders. He received his Ph.D from Northwestern in Chicago.

His key note is on: The early onset of psychopathy and its development

There has been a long standing controversy concerning the validity of the various instruments designed to assess psychopathy. Much of the debate has focused on the issue of what are the appropriate number and labeling of the dimensions of psychopathy. This discussion has involved both theoretical/conceptual and validity questions; most importantly, the relative strength of the behavioral dimension versus the more theoretically central affective dimension in predicting and explaining recidivism as well as related outcomes such as violent crime. In addition, there has been considerable research on the validity of psychopathy regarding adolescents and even children. Recently, Cook, Hart and Logan have developed a new 6 dimensional measure of pyschopathy, the Comprehensive Assessment of Psychopathy Personality (CAPP), which they and others have been undertaking validity tests with adults. This address will both review the debate that led to the development of the CAPP and present an empirical assessment of its internal validity regarding a sample of 200 incarcerated young offenders.