Differential treatment in the youth justice system - Equality and ...

DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN THE YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEMTable D7Model of dismissal versus other court outcome: FemaleLogistic regression95.0% Confidence IntervalOdds/ for Odds/ Exp(B)Exp(B) Lower Bound Upper BoundEthnicity: Base=WhiteAsian 1.15 0.47 2.82Black 1.06 0.63 1.79Mixed 1.06 0.62 1.83Aged 16+ 0.98 0.69 1.38Remand 1.23 0.32 4.67Crown Court 3.84* 1.26 11.72Plead not guilty 25.85** 16.79 39.79No. previous convictions: Base=01-3 1.14 0.72 1.804-5 0.91 0.48 1.726-10 1.00 0.56 1.7910+ 0.84 0.45 1.57Previous Custodial Sentence 0.96 0.39 2.39Persistent Young Offender 1.07 0.94 1.22Breach in case 1.07 0.69 1.66No. of unique offences per casebase=12-3 0.76 0.50 1.154+ 0.28 0.03 3.00Violence against the person 0.93 0.58 1.48Burglary 2.01 0.57 7.06Robbery 1.27 0.29 5.56Drugs 0.42 0.05 3.47Theft and handling 0.52** 0.30 0.90Gravity score 6+ 0.38 0.10 1.43Area: Base=BArea A 2.66* 1.21 5.85Area C 2.46** 1.33 4.56Area D 1.93 0.83 4.48Area E 0.85 0.38 1.93Area G 0.59 0.27 1.26Area H 1.36 0.68 2.71Area I 1.39 0.61 3.18Area J 0.58 0.27 1.26Area K 1.10 0.56 2.18Area L 2.29* 1.17 4.52** 1% level of significance * 5% level of significanceNote: Area was not included in the model of males as this violated the assumptions of logistic randomeffects and was not a good fit of the model as tested with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Ignoring theseviolations, Areas E, I, and L increased the odds while Areas G and J decreased the odds of having acase dismissed when compared to Area B.129