David Farrington died in November 2024 1. His loss will be widely and keenly felt, but his productivity through a lifetime’s devotion to understanding pathways to offending will live on. We are so sad to lose him, and yet his death has prompted reviews and celebrations of all that he has achieved through research2.
David was a role model for researchers in so many ways – but especially in the way he combined impeccable scientific approaches with lovely ways of relating to others. He was among the pioneers of successful prospective longitudinal studies starting with children as participants. Those in the study he started with Donald West – the Camberwell/Cambridge ‘Study in Delinquent Development’ – stayed with it; the boys grew into men and became fathers and even grandfathers and continued to work with the researchers, not least because they felt valued in their contribution to the work. This ensured one of the highest retention rates of any longitudinal study of its kind.
David’s relationships with researchers extended around the world – both to countries often linked by research to the UK and to new and original partnerships. David’s reach was remarkable and, following his lead, we can evidence that! Do have a look at a pair of special issues of the journal Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health (CBMH), just been published3, 4. We commend them to everyone interested in the work of Crime in Mind. David was a cofounding editor of CBMH, with John Gunn and I; later, Mary McMurran joined us in the core team. The principal editing of these special issues, however, was by others, close to David and who have subsequently joined the wider CBMH editorial team. Maria Ttofi, with intoxicating energy, led this special issue group that included Adrian Grounds and Keri Wong. As evidence of their skills and the huge esteem for David, one planned issue grew to two – with most papers documenting new findings from new research inspired by his collegiate efforts.
The two special issues include data from as far afield as Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK, Australia, Brazil, China and the USA. The Brazilian study is perhaps particularly impressive for its evaluation of a birth cohort of over 5,500 at intervals until age 30. This provides important confirmation that, with respect to pathways into crime, low-income countries are rather similar to higher income countries, with the majority of the population remaining law-abiding citizens and just 5% accounting for more than half of crimes generally and two-thirds of homicides3. It may seem obvious that this should inspire strategies that focus on blocking pathways into crime – on primary prevention of crime. David was all too aware, however, of how hard it is to translate science into action: ‘one challenge that confronts crime prevention is the worry by politicians that they may be perceived as soft on crime by supporting prevention instead of law and order measures …. It is held that the general deterrent effect of harsh sanctions will be sufficient to persuade others from embarking on a life of crime.’5 Even the US Department of Justice asserts that there is no evidence that harsh, harsher or harshest punishments deter crime6, although greater certainty of being caught may do so.
Research evidence is, of course, not complete, but even this cluster of research and commentaries in CBMH offers some evidence base for primary preventive possibilities – perhaps better ways of identifying those vulnerable to a criminal pathway, whether attributable mainly to some intrinsic but potentially remediable problem in neuropsychological functioning, to specific substances in the environment or the psychosocial structure of early environments, and of engaging offering solutions to or ameliorations of these problems – perhaps enhancing the school environment, perhaps offering nutritional supplements, perhaps offering specific cognitive or emotion recognition training techniques – and perhaps combinations tailored to each individual otherwise at risk of a criminological pathway through life.
Do take the time to glance at these issues, read on, follow through to other research and join in developing ideas that will be truly constructive. Good research will live on not only in itself, but especially as a building block for better societies with less criminal behaviour and more prevalent good mental health.
1 https://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/People/professor-david-farrington
2 CBMH Tributes: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11974237/
3 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/14712857/2025/35/1
4 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/14712857/2025/35/2
5 Welsh & Farrington, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2012.01.008
6 US Department of Justice, 2016. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247350.pdf
Research can transform lives. We want to support discoveries about what helps people with mental disorder who have been victims of criminal behaviour, or perpetrators of criminal behaviour, and their families, and the clinicians and others who treat them and, indeed, the wider community when its members are in contact with these problems. More effective prevention is the ideal, when this is not possible, we need more effective, evidenced interventions for recovery and restoration of safety.
Please help us by donating to Crime In Mind – DONATE TO CRIME IN MIND HERE
If you would like to become a Member of Crime In Mind please visit our website here.
Membership entitles all Members to the following benefits:
- Access to private members page on dedicated website containing Members discussion forums, document archive and resource libraries.
- Access to recordings of our previous webinars and seminars.
- Free attendance at suitable events awarding up to 10 CPD hours per annum.
- Opportunity to join the Executive committee subject to the conditions of the Articles of Association.