View - LIME Network

juvenile justice system was dismissed (57.6 per cent) or there was a communitybasedorder (53.5 per cent) (figure 9.2.6).• The greatest difference between the proportion of Indigenous andnon-Indigenous re-offenders was for juveniles receiving a fine as their firstcontact with the justice system (56.0 per cent of Indigenous juvenilesre-offended after receiving a fine compared to 25.8 per cent of non-Indigenousjuveniles) (figure 9.2.6).South AustraliaFigure 9.2.7 presents data from a cohort study assessing the extent to whichjuveniles in SA had formal contact with the juvenile justice system. Each juvenileincluded in the study was born in 1984 and the follow-up period was 18 years. InSA, a juvenile’s formal contact with the justice system commences when they areofficially apprehended by police, either by way of an arrest or report. The 1984cohort comprised 540 Indigenous juveniles and 20 362 non-Indigenous juveniles(table 9A.2.10).Data in figure 9.2.7 must be interpreted with caution as they do not measure theactual levels of offending as not all apprehended youths are subsequently foundguilty or admit guilt (although the majority do) (OCSAR 2005).Figure 9.2.7 SA, proportion of juveniles in the 1984 cohort which wereapprehended as juveniles (0–17 years), by the number ofapprehensions and Indigenous status a20IndigenousNon-Indigenous16Per cent128401 only 2–4 5–10 11–20 > 20Number of apprehensionsa Excludes 18 year olds.Source: OCSAR (2005); table 9A.2.11.OVERCOMINGINDIGENOUSDISADVANTAGE 2007