THE USE AND EFFECTS OF FINANCIAL PENALTIES IN MUNICIPAL COURTS

With prison, jail, and probation caseloads overloaded, financial penalties appeal as alternative sanctions. Using probation data for cases sentenced in municipal courts, this paper presents regression analyses suggesting that judges tended to employ rational discretion in imposing economic sanctions, for monetary assessments without jail were most likely to be given to low-risk offenders and assignment of probation alone and jail terms was most strongly influenced by offense. The amount of the financial sanction was also significantly related to the type of crime. Controlling for individual attributes and offense, the odds of subsequent arrest and incarceration were significantly less for those given a financial penalty than for those receiving a jail sentence.     

STRUCTURAL POSITION AND VIOLENCE: DEVELOPING A CULTURAL EXPLANATION*

Research assessing the capacity of a cultural explanation to account for the relationship between certain structural positions and high rates of criminal violence has ignored a significant intervening variable. That variable is disputatiousness—the likelihood of being offended by a negative outcome and seeking reparation through protest. This article develops a cultural model of disputatiousness and aggressiveness. It hypothesizes that individuals who occupy positions featuring high rates of violence are more likely than their counterparts to be offended by a negative outcome, to protest the injury, and to use force when the protest fails. It also hypothesizes that differential disputatiousness and aggressiveness are most pronounced when the negative outcome involves an attack on the self by an equal in a public setting. Testing these hypotheses calls for individual level data bearing on behavioral dispositions under a variety of circumstances. A methodological procedure for collecting such data is proposed, and suggestions for future research are discussed.     

PUBLIC OPINION AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE JUVENILE COURT*

Over 100 years ago, juvenile courts emerged out of the belief that juveniles are different from adults—less culpable and more rehabilitatable—and can be "saved" from a life of crime and disadvantage. Today, the juvenile justice system is under attack through increasing calls to eliminate it and enactment of statutes designed to place younger offenders in the adult justice system. However, little evidence exists that policy makers have taken the full range of public views into account. At the same time, scholarly accounts of calls to eliminate the juvenile justice system have neglected the role of public opinion. The current study addresses this situation by examining public views about 1) abolishing juvenile justice and 2) the proper upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction. Particular attention is given to the notion that child‐saving and "get tough" orientations influence public views about juvenile justice. The analyses suggest support for the lingering appeal of juvenile justice among the public and the idea that youth can be “saved,” as well as arguments about the politicization and criminalization of juvenile justice. They also highlight that the public, like states, holds variable views about the appropriate age of juvenile court jurisdiction. We discuss the implications of the study and avenues for future research. Why is it not just and proper to treat these juvenile offenders, as we deal with the neglected children, as a wise and merciful father handles his own child whose errors are not discovered by the authorities? Why is it not the duty of the state, instead of asking merely whether a boy or a girl has committed a specific offense, to find out what he is, physically, mentally, morally, and then if it learns that he is treading the path that leads to criminality, to take him in charge, not so much to punish as to reform, not to degrade but to uplift, not to crush but to develop, to make him not a criminal but a worthy citizen.     

SOCIAL CLASS AS A FACTOR AFFECTING JUDICIAL DISPOSITION Defendants Charged with Criminal Homosexual Acts

This article examines the proposition that criminal defendants from lower social classes receive more severe judicial disposition than do criminal defendants from hgher social classes Evidence from cases involving prosecution for felonious homosexual acts does not lend much support to the proposition that there is social class bias in judicial disposition of criminal cases. Several models are discussed which might be used to orient future research into how courts handle criminal cases.     

THE ONSET AND PERSISTENCE OF OFFENDING*

This paper assesses the need for and focus of developmental theories of crime by analyzing three questions: (1) whether age of onset of criminal behavior has a causal impact on subsequent behavior, (2) whether the determinants of onset vary, at least in part, with age, and (3) whether the determinants of onset and continuation of offending differ in some respects. The inverse association between age of onset and persistence of offending is found to be entirely attributable to time-stable individual differences and, thus, is not attributable to a causal linkage. However, evidence is found of the covariates of onset changing with age and differences in the covariates of onset and of the continuation of offending.