Aim: First, to determine whether STMP-II reduces violent and property crime. Second, to determine whether DV-STMP reduces Domestic Violence (DV) related crime. Third, to determine whether these programs operate through deterrence or incapacitation. Finally, to determine whether STMP-II has a differential impact on juveniles versus adults and Aboriginal Australians versus non-Aboriginal Australians. Method: I use court outcome data in conjunction with the complete list of individuals subject to either program between May 2005 and September 2018. Using these data, I compare rates of offending and imprisonment in the 12 months before and after an individual becomes subject to either program. In my analysis of STMP-II, I focus on specific violent and property offences to avoid reporting/detection bias from contaminating the estimates. In my analysis of DV-STMP, I also examine DV offences as they are the focus of the program. In order to determine whether either program operates through deterrence or incapacitation, I divide the sample into cohorts based on how much time each individual spent in custody during their follow up. Using these cohorts, I then estimate how much of the total crime reduction associated with either program can be explained by each cohort. I then apply these approaches to Aboriginal Australians and juveniles to explore whether these effects differ for both subgroups. Results: STMP-II is associated with large, practically and statistically significant reductions in property crime, but not violent crime. This crime reduction is also, however, accompanied by an increase in the risk of imprisonment. Although STMP-II increases the risk of imprisonment, the vast majority of the crime reduction benefit occurs through deterrence. DV-STMP is associated with large, practically and statistically significant reductions in DV crime, but not other types of crime. DV-STMP has no association with the risk of imprisonment. When compared to adults, STMP-II is associated with a larger crime reduction benefit for juveniles. STMP-II has no discernible impact on the risk of imprisonment for juveniles. When compared to non-Aboriginal people, STMP-II is associated with a smaller crime reduction benefit, and a smaller increase in the risk of imprisonment for Aboriginal Australians. The crime reduction benefit for both groups occurs predominately through deterrence. Conclusion: Both STMP-II and DV-STMP are effective in reducing crime. Both programs predominately reduce crime through deterrence. These claims also hold for juveniles and Aboriginal Australians.