Stereotypes influence beliefs about transfer and sentencing of juvenile offenders

Despite sharp drops in juvenile crime since the mid-1980s, punitive policies regarding juveniles who commit serious offenses still exist. We assessed beliefs about two such practices: transferring offenders from the juvenile justice to the criminal justice system, and subjecting them to sentences of life without parole (LWOP). We examined whether stereotypes about juvenile offenders – the extent to which people believe they are dispositionally violent superpredators versus economically and socially impoverished wayward youth – influence support for these policies. We measured 321 participants’ beliefs about the causes of juvenile crime and juveniles’ potential for recidivism and rehabilitation. Using vignette methodology and actual case facts, we described a 13-, 17-, or 21-year-old offender who murdered a stranger or abusive parent, and asked whether he should be transferred to criminal court and sentenced to LWOP. As endorsement of the superpredator stereotype increased, so did support for these practices. Offenders who murdered an abusive parent were shown more leniency. Older offenders were generally treated harsher, except by people with strong superpredator stereotypes who, on the issue of LWOP appropriateness, did not distinguish among juveniles of different ages. Findings suggest that stereotypes can influence judgments in cases involving juveniles and indirectly affect policy-making about juvenile offending.     

Demeanor,sex, and race in police processing

Recent increases in arrests of women have stimulated much controversy about the causes and extent of female crime and created much speculation about the differential treatment of female offenders by police officers. This article reports an empirical study of police processing of female offenders. During September–December 1978, 282 questionnaires were completed by police officers and detectives in a large, metropolitan area in a southeastern state. Each officer was asked to indicate a police decision in five hypothetical situations which varied by types of offense, race of the offender, sex of the offender, and demeanor of the offender. An analysis of the responses of the police officers indicates that decisions of police are not contingent on the sex and race of the offenders. The major variables in determining how police officers will respond are the nature of the offense and the manner in which the offender behaves when confronted by the officer.     

Social information processing, subtypes of violence, and a progressive construction of culpability and punishment in juvenile justice

Consistent with core principles of liberal theories of punishment (including humane treatment of offenders, respecting offender rights, parsimony, penal proportionality, and rehabilitation), progressive frameworks have sought to expand doctrines of mitigation and excuse in order to reduce culpability and punishment. With respect to juvenile justice, scholars have proposed that doctrinal mitigation be broadened, and that adolescents, due to aspects of developmental immaturity (such as decision-making capacity), be punished less severely than adults who commit the same crimes. One model of adolescent antisocial behavior that may be useful to a progressive theory of punishment in juvenile justice distinguishes between instrumental violence, by which the actor behaves thoughtfully and calmly to achieve personal gain, and reactive violence, which is characterized as impulsive, emotional retaliation toward a perceived threat or injustice. In particular, social cognitive differences between instrumental and reactive violence have implications for responsibility, length and structure of incarceration, rehabilitation, and other issues that are central to a progressive theory of juvenile culpability and punishment.     

Do staff attitudes vary by position?: A look at one juvenile correctional center

Correctional staff are a vital part of an inmate’s institutional experience. Prior research suggests interaction between staff and inmates may be a function of worker attitudes toward crime and punishment. The current study examines attitudes about crime causation and punishment by surveying correctional staff members at a single-purpose juvenile treatment center. Correctional officers and treatment personnel exhibit different levels of support for rehabilitative ideals. Organizational ramifications stemming from these divergent outlooks are discussed.     

Criers,liars, and manipulators: Probation officers' views of girls

This study examines the perceptions of girls held by juvenile probation officers, psychologists, and others involved in juvenile court decision making. Through qualitative analysis of girls' probation case files and indepth interviews with juvenile probation officers, we discuss the social construction of gender, race, culture, and class. Our findings suggest that in an environment marked by scarce resources, gender and racial/ethnic stereotypes leave girls few options for treatment and services in the juvenile court. Some probation officers expressed distaste for working with girls and had little understanding of culturally or gender-specific programming. Others were frustrated by the lack of programming options for girls in the state. Based on our findings, we question whether the current ideology or structure of juvenile probation can nurture a holistic approach to justice for girls.     

Diverting and Abdicating Judicial Discretion: Cultural, Political, and Procedural Dynamics in California Juvenile Justice

Although tensions between substantive and formal rationality in the adult criminal justice system have received a great deal of attention, the existence of these tensions in the juvenile justice system has received little scholarly consideration. I seek to remedy this gap by exploring how punitive policies associated with the war on crime impact the formal and informal process of justice, the court community and work group, and the exercise of discretion in the juvenile courts. Drawing on qualitative data collected in three juvenile courts in Southern California, I identify the mechanisms by which prosecutors divert judicial discretion from the traditional rehabilitation-oriented bench officers to bench officers who are more accepting of the criminalization of juveniles. In addition, I investigate how and why rehabilitation-oriented bench officers at times abdicate their decisionmaking authority and make rulings that contradict their own assessments. My findings suggest that as the war on crime is extended to youth, the juvenile courts increasingly share the criminal courts' emphasis on offense rather than offender, enhanced prosecutorial power, and adversarial relationships within the court.     

Social context and racial disparities in punishment decisions

Although the social context of a court is often claimed to be important to understanding the effect of the offender's race on punishment decisions, the links between context and racial disparities in punishment decisions are not well understood. I propose and test four hypotheses involving elements that may link social context to racial disparities in punishment decisions: urbanization, racial threat, economic threat, and crime control. I test these four hypotheses with sentencing data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing for the period 1991 to 1994. The main findings are as follows: (1) punishment severity varies by court jurisdiction, even after controlling for offender and case characteristics; (2) racial disparities vary by court jurisdiction, with controls for other offender and case characteristics; (3) measures of social context explain little of the contextual variation in punishment decisions for all offenders; and (4) measures of social context do not explain racial disparities in punishment decisions. Thus, I find convincing evidence of contextual variation in punishment decisions, but typical indicators of social context do not explain these variations.     

Trauma‐Informed Approaches to Juvenile Justice: A Critical Race Perspective

Youth of color experience disproportionate juvenile justice contact and recidivism. Trauma‐informed approaches may provide important support to these youth and improve their future outcomes. This paper describes dynamics of the various levels of the juvenile justice system (i.e., police contact, courts, correctional placement, aftercare) that perpetuate psychological trauma among adjudicated youth of color. This paper explores trauma‐informed approaches from a critical race theory perspective to address issues of systemic racial injustice in the juvenile justice system. Current and emerging models for trauma‐informed juvenile justice and implications for practice, policy, and research are discussed.     

Restoring the Victim: Emotional Reactions, Justice Beliefs, and Support for Reparation and Punishment

Psychological responses to criminal wrongdoing have primarily focused on the offender, particularly on how (and why) offender punishment satisfies people’s need for justice. However, the restoration of the victim presents another way in which the “psychological itch” that injustice creates can be addressed. In the present article, I discuss two lay theories of how crime victims can be restored: a belief that the harm caused to crime victims should be directly repaired (a restorative justice approach) versus a belief that victim harm should be addressed via the punishment of the offender (a retributive justice approach). These two lay theories are discussed with regard to their emotional and ideological determinants, as well as situational and chronic factors that can affect whether people adopt a reparative or punitive “justice mindset” in dealing with victim concerns (and crime in general).     

CONTROLLING OTHER PEOPLE'S CHILDREN: RACIALIZED VIEWS OF DELINQUENCY AND WHITES’ PUNITIVE ATTITUDES TOWARD JUVENILE OFFENDERS*

The juvenile justice system was founded on, and until recently developed around, the idea that society should afford delinquents more leniency and rehabilitative care than adult criminals because of their lower levels of physical and cognitive development and, thus, diminished culpability for law violations and higher amenability to treatment. The past four decades, however, have witnessed a sustained movement to recriminalize delinquency through the enactment of policies that treat juvenile offenders more like their adult counterparts. Feld (1999a) and others have argued that this punitive turn in juvenile justice is in part a result of the racialization of delinquency and violent victimization in the post–Civil Rights era. This study provides the first test of the key assumption underlying this thesis, namely, that Whites’ support for getting tough with juvenile offenders is in part tied to racialized views of youth crime. Drawing on data from a recent national survey, we examine the extent to which relative racial typifications about delinquency and victimization, as well as racial resentment, are associated with general punitiveness toward juvenile offenders as well as support for lower minimum ages of criminal justice jurisdiction. Regression results show that Whites who hold such typifications and those who are more racially resentful are both more likely to embrace punitive youth justice policies and favor transfers for younger offenders. The implications of the findings are discussed.     

Causes and consequences of juvenile crime and violence: Public attitudes and question-order effect

This article examines issues in juvenile justice that include public opinion about the causes and the consequences of juvenile crime and violence. Data for the study were collected in 1996 by means of a telephone survey of 492 respondents from Shelby County, Tennessee. The study explores the relationships between attitudes about juvenile crime and sociodemographic factors. Results are consistent with national surveys aimed at assessing public attitudes toward issues in juvenile justice. Finally, the article discusses how survey instrumentation may influence responses regarding the issues surrounding juvenile crime and violence.     

VULNERABLE VICTIMS,MONSTROUS OFFENDERS,AND UNMANAGEABLE RISK: EXPLAINING PUBLIC OPINION ON THE SOCIAL CONTROL OF SEX CRIME

With the possible exception of terrorists, sex offenders in the United States experience a greater degree of punishment and restriction than any other offender group, nonviolent or violent. Members of the public overwhelmingly support “get tough” sex crime policies and display an intense hostility toward persons labeled “sex criminals.” The theoretical literature has identified three models potentially explaining public opinion on the social control of sex crime: the victim‐oriented concerns model, the sex offender stereotypes model, and the risk‐management concerns model. However, empirical work that directly tests these models is absent. This article addresses that gap by analyzing national survey data that includes measures of the key concepts outlined in the different theoretical models and items gauging support for punitive sex crime laws as well as support for sex offender treatment. The findings provide partial support for all three models but suggest that extant theories can better explain support for punitive sex crime policies than views about sex offender treatment.     

An Evaluation of Teen Court as a Juvenile Crime Diversion Program

Theories of procedural justice support the American legal system's search for a fair and effective means of diverting offenders from the juvenile court system. Teen Court programs, in which juvenile offenders are tried and sentenced by a jury of peers, are one of the latest developments in attempts to positively influence offenders and direct them free of crime. The present research found that participation in Teen Court increased offenders' legal knowledge and enhanced their attitudes toward some authority figures (i.e., the judge) and themselves to a greater extent than non‐offending juveniles. In addition, only 12.6 percent of juvenile offenders re‐offended within five months of their initial Teen Court involvement. Improved attitudes toward authority and self were associated with a lower incidence of recidivism. Overall, these results contribute to the growing literature indicating that Teen Court can be an effective juvenile crime diversion program. This article also discusses methodological issues for future program evaluations.     

Decision Making in Delinquency Cases: The Role of Race and Juveniles' Admission/Denial of the Crime

Investigated how accused delinquents' admission/denial of their crimes affected adjudication and disposition decisions. An archival analysis of 2,043 adjudication decisions in 16 Georgia counties found that juveniles who admitted committing their crimes were treated more severely than juveniles who denied committing their crimes. Whites were more likely than Blacks to admit committing the crime, and, after controlling for this and other legal factors, race did not have a significant effect. In the second study, 67 judges, 53 probation officers, and 126 court service workers made adjudication and disposition decisions about three juveniles in an experimental simulation in which race of juvenile, length of prior record, and the juvenile's reaction to the crime (admitting or denying it) were systematically manipulated. Consistent with the archival study, juveniles who admitted committing their offense were treated more severely than juveniles who denied committing their offense. Possible reasons are discussed for why admitting a crime leads to more punishment.     

Sex,Gender, Multidimensional Value Space,and Social Cultural Resistance—Afrocentrism

This article examines the applicability of the theory of multidimensional value space by Lynn A. Curtis and the theory of social cultural resistance—Afrocentrism by Daniel E. Georges-Abeyie for explaining so-called Black crime and Black juvenile delinquency in general and Black female crime and Black female juvenile delinquency in particular. It notes that the increase in so-called Black crime and Black juvenile delinquency in general and Black female crime and Black female juvenile delinquency in particular may be illusion, not fact. This article notes that perception, at times illusion, may have, and frequently does have, real outcomes, including criminal justice outcomes and delinquency outcomes. It notes that the so-called Black racial monolith is a fiction that race and ethnicity are distinct entities, as are sex and gender that the so-called Black racial monolith consists of distinct Black ethnic identities. The article notes that Black crime, female and male, and adult and juvenile delinquency may be manifestations of primary psychopathy, secondary psychopathy, and dyssocial psychopathy, as noted in the theory of social cultural resistance—Afrocentrism.     

Factors related to recidivism for youthful offenders

Little is known about youth who were previously placed in a detention facility and what factors predict a subsequent recidivism to placement. This study of a two-county juvenile offender population (one urban and one rural) investigates what demographic, educational, mental health, substance dependence, and court-related variables predict recidivism to detention placement. Findings from logistic regression analysis indicate that seven variables significantly predict juvenile offenders’ recidivism placement, some expected and some unexpected. Predictors that made recidivism more likely include youth with a previous conduct disorder diagnosis, a self-reported previous suicide attempt, age, and number of court offenses. Conversely, predictors that made recidivism less likely include race (Caucasian), a previous attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder diagnosis, and a misdemeanor conviction. These findings indicate that the use of a community-based suicide and mental health screening and referral approach may help to identify and assist these high-risk youth in receiving needed services prior to juvenile court involvement or during delinquency adjudication.     

Race,Crime, and Criminal Justice

Fifty years ago, the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson did not frequently mention race and ethnicity in its discussion of and recommendations for the criminal justice system, but it did have a lot to say about race and crime. Through the use of arrest rates to measure racial differentials in criminal involvement, the Commission concluded that Blacks commit more crime as a consequence of Black people living in greater numbers in criminogenic “slum” conditions. To address racial differences, the Commission favored the Great Society programs of Johnson's War on Poverty. Contemporary criminologists continue to debate the racial distribution of crime, the causes of crimes, and the best policies to reduce crime and racial differentials. The Commission did not anticipate the current debate among scholars regarding how much racial disproportionality exists in the criminal justice system and its causes and consequences. The policies that led to mass incarceration have been significant drivers of continued criminal justice racial disparity. Those policies are inconsistent with the recommendation in The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (1967), upending the pursuit of a more fair and just system.     

论犯罪构成新体系之常识、常理、常情化

犯罪构成新体系的常识、常理、常情化是刑法的常识、常理、常情化的一个极其重要的体现和组成。犯罪构成新体系的常识、常理、常情化是其人权保障机能的根本保障,有其必然性、道德性、价值性与环节性。犯罪构成新体系的常识、常理、常情化始于罪状形合性的常识、常理、常情化而终于应受刑罚惩罚性的常识、常理、常情化,而应受刑罚惩罚性的常识、常理、常情化不仅积累着始于罪状形合性的常识、常理、常情化,而且还要求着刑罚目的和刑事政策的常识、常理、常情化。     

The Influence of Parole Officers’ Attitudes on Supervision Practices

The supervision of offenders conditionally released into communities is one of the primary functions of parole officers. Scholars have hypothesized that officers’ attitudes towards supervision may influence their job performance. Yet there are few studies which have examined the influence of parole officers’ attitudes on their actual supervision practices, and studies of the attitude–behavior relationship among other justice system actors have revealed mixed findings. This study involved an examination of the relationship between officers’ attitudes towards supervision and their supervisory responses to offender behavior. Findings revealed that officers’ attitudes influence their intended behaviors. However, results of the analyses of the potential relationship between officers’ attitudes and their actual behaviors were mixed. Officers’ attitudes had no effect on their rate of issuing community-based sanctions, but officers who held more authoritative attitudes were more likely to pursue revocation hearings for offender noncompliance.