Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

Juvenile Arrests 2008, December 2009 http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/publications/StatBBAbstract.asp?

BibID=250498 In 2008, law enforcement agencies in the United States made an estimated 2.11 million arrests of persons younger than age 18. Overall, there were 3% fewer juvenile arrests in 2008 than in 2007, and juvenile violent crime arrests fell 2%, continuing a recent decline. Juvenile arrest rates, par-ticularly Violent Crime Index rates, had increased in 2005 and again in 2006 amid fears that the Nation was on the brink of another juvenile crime wave. These latest data show increases in some offense categories but declines in mostwith most changes being less than 10% in either direction. These findings are drawn from data that local law enforcement agencies across the country report to the FBIs Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Juveniles accounted for 16% of all violent crime arrests. Juveniles were involved in 12% of all violent crimes cleared in 2008. More than one-third (38%) of all juvenile murder victims were younger than age 5, but this proportion varied widely across demographic groups. The juvenile murder arrest rate in 2008 was 3.8 arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10 through 17. This was 17% more than the 2004 low of 3.3, but 74% less than the 1993 peak of 14.4. The 2008 arrest rates for Violent Crime Index offenses were substantially lower than the rates in the 1994 peak year for every age group younger than 40. The juvenile proportion of arrests exceeded the juvenile proportion of crimes cleared (or closed) by arrest in each offense category, reflecting that juveniles are more likely than adults to commit crimes in groups and to be arrested. Law enforcement agencies are more likely to clear (or close) crimes that juveniles commit than those that adults commit. Thus, law enforcement records may overestimate juvenile responsibility for crime. The FBI assesses trends in violent crimes by monitoring four offenses that law enforcement agencies nationwide consistently report. These four crimesmurder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault form the Violent Crime Index. Following 10 years of declines between 1994 and 2004, juvenile arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses increased from 2004 to 2006, then declined in each of the next 2 years. Given that the number of arrests in 2004 was less than in any year since 1987, the number of juvenile Violent Crime Index arrests in 2008 was still relatively low. In fact, the number of juvenile violent crime arrests in 2008 was less than any year in the 1990s, and just 3% greater than the average annual number of such arrests between 2001 and 2007. In most states, some persons younger than age 18 are, because of their age or by statutory exclusion, under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system. In 2008, 22% of arrests involving youth who were eligible in their State for processing in the juvenile justice system were handled within law enforcement agencies and the youth were released, 66% were referred to juvenile court, and 10% were referred directly to criminal court. The others were referred to a welfare agency or to another police agency. In 2008, the proportion of juvenile arrests sent to juvenile court in cities with a population of more than 250,000 (66%) was similar to that in smaller cities (68%). Of all juvenile arrests for violent crimes in 2008, 47% involved white youth, 52% involved black youth, 1% involved Asian youth, and 1% involved American Indian youth.

In the 1980s, the Violent Crime Index arrest rate for black juveniles was between 6 and 7 times the white rate. This ratio declined during the 1990s, holding at 4 to 1 from 1999 to 2004. Since 2004, the racial disparity in the rates increased, reaching 5 to 1. This increase resulted from an increase in the black rate (24%) and a decline in the white rate (3%). Juveniles showed the largest decline in Violent Crime Index arrest rates between 1994 and 2008falling 40% or more in each age group from 10 through 17. Children's Exposure to Violence: A Comprehensive National Survey, October 2009 http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/publications/StatBBAbstract.asp?BibID=249751 Children who are exposed to violence undergo lasting physical, mental, and emotional harm. They suffer from difficulties with attachment, regressive behavior, anxiety and depression, and aggression and conduct problems. They may be more prone to dating violence, delinquency, further victimization, and involvement with the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Moreover, being exposed to violence may impair a childs capacity for partnering and parenting later in life, continuing the cycle of violence into the next generation. Anyone who interacts with children has a responsibility to create interventions, both physical and psychological, that decrease or prevent the harms associated with exposure to violence. These include ways of interacting sensitively and expeditiously with children, ensuring protective environments and caregivers, and helping children use positive coping skills. OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book, April 2009 http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/probation/qa07102.asp Probation was ordered in 50% of the more than 1.1 million delinquency cases that received a juvenile court sanction in 2007. Characteristics of Juvenile Suicide in Confinement, February 2009 http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/publications/statbb.asp?ID=T40 The study identified 110 juvenile suicides occurring between 1995 and 1999. Data were analyzed for the 79 cases that had complete survey information. Of these 79 suicides, 42 percent occurred in training schools and other secure facilities, 37 percent in detention centers, 15 percent in residential treatment centers, and 6 percent in reception or diagnostic centers.

Of the 409,200 person offense cases that juvenile courts disposed in 2007, 58% (238,400) were handled formally (i.e., a petition was filed requesting an adjudicatory or transfer hearing). Of these petitioned cases, 60% (143,600) resulted in the youth being adjudicated delinquent in the juvenile justice system, 38% (90,700) resulted in the youth being adjudicated not delinquent, and 2% (4,100) were judicially waived to criminal court. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/QA/Detail.aspx?Id=113&context=9 There is no national recidivism rate for juveniles. Such a rate would not have much meaning since juvenile justice systems vary so much across states. The Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice (VDJJ) contacted other states to collect information on juvenile recidivism studies across the country. Nine states measured rearrest, 2 measured rereferral to court, 13 measured reconviction/readjudication, and 15 measured reincarceration/reconfinement. Jensen and Metsgers (1994) time-series analysis for the years 1976 to 1986 found a 13-percent increase in arrest rates for violent crime committed by 14-to 18-year-olds in Idaho after the State implemented its transfer law in 1981. In comparison, between 1982 and 1986, the arrest rates for similarly aged juveniles decreased in the neighboring States of Montana and Wyoming (which retained transfer procedures similar to those Idaho had before 1981).

Arkansas, Missouri, and Minnesota all reported recidivism (reconfinment because of delinquent offenses) rates of about 12% over a 5 year period. Competency, 2005 http://www.opd.ohio.gov/Juvenile/Jv_Competency.htm Specific information that must be included in the competency evaluation including the juveniles ability to comprehend the charges, communicate with counsel, understand the proceedings, and appreciate the range of potential dispositions. Also, information that must not be included in the competency evaluation, including details of the offense as reported by the juvenile. Juveniles Competence to Stand Trial, 2007 http://www.wisspd.org/html/training/ProgMaterials/Juv07/JCST.pdf Abilities associated with adjudicative competence were assessed among 927 adolescents in juvenile detention facilities and community settings. Adolescents abilities were compared to those of 466 young adults in jails and in the community. Participants at four locations across the United States completed a standardized measure of abilities relevant for competence to stand trial as well as a new procedure for assessing psychosocial influences on legal decisions often required of defendants. Youths aged 15 and younger performed more poorly than did young adults, with a greater proportion manifesting a level of impairment consistent with that of persons found incompetent to stand trial. Adolescents also tended more often than young adults to make choices (e.g., about plea agreements) that reflected compliance with authority, as well as influences of psychosocial immaturity. The MacArthur Juvenile Adjudicative Competence Study http://www.adjj.org/downloads/58competence_study_summary.pdf The study found that juveniles aged 11 to 13 were more than three times as likely as young adults (individuals aged 18 to 24) to be seriously impaired on the evaluation of competence-relevant abilities, and that juveniles aged 14 to 15 were twice as likely as young adults to be seriously impaired. Individuals aged 15 and younger also differed from young adults in their legal decisionmaking. For example, younger individuals were less likely to recognize the risks inherent in different choices and less likely to think about the long-term consequences of their choices (e.g., choosing between confessing versus remaining silent when being questioned by the police). Performance on the evaluation did not vary as a function of individuals gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic background, prior experience in the legal system, or symptoms of mental health problems. The study did not find differences between juveniles aged 15 and 17 and young adults in abilities relevant to their competence to stand trial. The results of this study indicate that, compared to adults, a significantly greater proportion of juveniles in the community who are 15 and younger, and an even larger proportion of juvenile offenders this age, are probably not competent to stand trial in a criminal proceeding. States that transfer large numbers of juveniles who are 15 and under to the criminal justice system may be subjecting significant numbers of individuals to trial proceedings for which they lack the basic capacities recognized as essential for competent participation as a defendant. Juvenile Competency to Stand Trial, 2010 http://www.suite101.com/content/juvenile-competency-to-stand-trial-a244377 Many adolescents who have contact with an attorney for their representation and defense in a court situation also fail to fully comprehend the attorney's role. For example, some may consider the attorney an adult who is there to help if they believe the juvenile is "innocent," as well as misunderstanding the attorney-client privilege concept. This can lead to the juvenile not giving truthful information for their defense, even if it might benefit their case.

Young People and Crime: Costs and Prevention http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/abstractdb/AbstractDBDetails.aspx?id=153791 Incarceration of youthful offenders costs about 12 times as much as releasing juveniles under some form of noncustodial supervision; both approaches have been equally effective in terms of recidivism. Criminal Neglect: Substance Abuse, Juvenile Justice and the Children Left Behind, 2004 http://www.casacolumbia.org/articlefiles/379-Criminal%20Neglect.pdf Most cases referred to juvenile courts (57.7 percent) involve children age 15 and younger. Instead of helping, we are writing off young Americans--releasing them without needed services, punishing them without providing help to get back on track, locking them up in conditions of overcrowding and violence, leaving these children behind. Instances of mistreatment and overcrowded and inhumane facilities that in effect encourage these children to continue a life of crime have been documented in a number of states including California, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada and New York. Analysis of Juvenile Crime, 2000 http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/juvenile/resources/threeYearPlan/section2.pdf The present age distribution of the juvenile at-risk population, aged 10-17, as per the 2000 census, is quite even with each age representing between 12% and 13.2% of this population.

Вам также может понравиться