Since 2007 the police and the public prosecution service in the Netherlands can apply special investigative powers in case of ‘indications’ of a terrorist offense. To investigate signs of terrorism, a suspicion is no longer needed. The underlying assumption behind this extension is that the ‘old’ legislation offers insufficient opportunities to investigate signs of terrorism in an early phase. In this article we examine this assumption about the action space of investigating officers. For the period 2007-2011, we examined how investigating officers responded to signs of terrorism in practice, what investigative powers they used, and how they – as street level bureaucrats – handled their discretionary authority. The research shows that police and judiciary officials are very well able to investigate signs of terrorism with the already existing powers, and that they have made little use of the new ‘indications’ criterion

The current study examined the extent to which risk factors and treatment readiness were related to prison based treatment engagement (i.e. participation and completion), using a large sample of detainees who were a candidate for the Prevention of Recidivism program. Analyses showed that offenders who were treatment ready were over two times more likely to complete treatment programs, compared to offenders who were not. Risk factors did, for the most part, not correlate with treatment participation and completion. Outcomes underlined the importance of motivational aspects and showed the significance of enhancing treatment readiness amongst correctional resocialisation participants.

Sentencing research focusing solely on unsuspended imprisonment does no justice to the practice of sentencing, where many other punishment types are imposed – often conjunctly. To investigate to what extent this imprisonment bias might have caused incomplete and thereby biased findings, we compare the effects of offender characteristics for imprisonment to those for other sanction types, as well as to a model combining sanction types. Findings suggest that the effects of offender characteristics differ per sanction type. When combinations of sanction types are taken into account, some offender characteristics do no longer have mitigating or aggravating effects, or the effects even inverted. Hence, future sentencing research should aim to include all sentences imposed.