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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN THE YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEMevidence that discrimination plays a direct role in limiting economic opportunities(Wood et al., 2009; Heath and Cheung, 2006).Unemployment among black adults is significantly higher than among whites.The social geography of educational provision too is such that children in poorercommunities are less well provided for and routes to advancement are accordinglymore constrained: educational underachievement is both a symptom and a causeof disadvantage. At the same time, rates of school exclusion tend to be almosttwice as high for black children, raising questions about whether different ‘tariffs’of punishments operate within schools, and about the relevance of the nationalcurriculum to the needs and experiences of black young people. The relationshipbetween lack of educational opportunities and youth crime is well established and theparticular underachievement of black boys is a ‘major cause of entry into the criminaljustice system’ (House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, 2007: paragraph 113).The Home Affairs Committee (2007) also found that characteristics within the blackcommunity may have the potential to compound disadvantage. Higher rates of loneparenting, a consequent lack of appropriate male role models, and the quality ofparental discipline were all considered by the Committee to be problematic.Black children are also significantly over-represented in the care system,which is frequently recognised as a risk factor for offending.Research shows that offences such as robbery are more prevalent in poorneighbourhoods, and young people at greatest risk of involvement in street crime livein households with no adult earners where a criminal economy is in competition withlegitimate forms of subsistence (FitzGerald et al., 2003; FitzGerald, 2006:8). Inevidence to the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, FitzGerald concludedthat ‘44 and 45 per cent respectively of all “mixed” and “black” respondents lived in“council estates and low income areas” compared to 18 per cent of whites’.Traditionally, criminologists have tended to resist the idea that some ethnic minoritygroups are over-involved in offending. However, the weight of criminological theoryand research is that patterns of social exclusion must place ethnic minority groups atconsiderable risk of involvement in crime. Arguably the phenomenon in need of7
INTRODUCTIONexplanation is that young people from some of the most socially marginal ethnicminority groups, notably Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, have not historically beenover-represented in offending.There currently appears to be a change of mood on this issue, with academics,politicians and other commentators being prepared to address the possibility thatsocial exclusion may be responsible for some ethnic minority groups’ overrepresentationin offending. For example, the House of Commons Home AffairsCommittee (2007) found that one of the ‘primary causes’ of the over-representationof some ethnic minority groups in the criminal process was social exclusion(paragraph 98). Their report argued that young black people are disproportionatelysubject to socio-economic disadvantage that manifests itself in a variety of ways.Social exclusion, educational underachievement and school exclusion interact toform a web of disadvantage, bringing young black people disproportionately intocontact with crime and the criminal justice system as both victims and offenders(House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, 2007:53).Differential policingThe possibility that some ethnic groups are more involved than others in crime may,of course, co-exist with differential policing. While other criminal justice agencies mayaffect patterns of over-representation at the margins, there are reasons to think thatthe police can exert a considerable influence on who enters, and who is divertedfrom, the youth justice system. Some commentators have argued that the policing ofethnic minority groups, in particular black adults and young people, is characterisedby a ‘pervasive, ongoing targeting of black areas’ (Bowling and Phillips, 2002:129),deriving from an association of young black people with criminality. Macpherson(1999) described this as institutional racism. Certainly, police activity plays animportant role in ‘recruiting’ ethnic minority young people to the youth justice system(Webster, 2006). Young black people are almost twice as likely as their white peersto enter the criminal justice system as a consequence of being stopped and searchedby the police (Home Affairs Select Committee, 2007: paragraph 166).8
Page 1 and 2: Equality and Human Rights Commissio
Page 3 and 4: © Equality and Human Rights Commis
Page 5 and 6: Appendix A: Area profiles 97Appendi
Page 7 and 8: Tables and figuresPageTables3.1 Pop
Page 9 and 10: GlossaryBCUBasic Command UnitCJSCri
Page 11: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYAssessing the reas
Page 15 and 16: EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPolice training•
Page 17 and 18: INTRODUCTIONover-represented in rob
Page 19 and 20: INTRODUCTIONthe increase in prosecu
Page 21: INTRODUCTIONIn contrast, a MORI sel
Page 25 and 26: INTRODUCTIONin itself, if the socia
Page 27 and 28: RESEARCH METHODS2. Research methods
Page 29 and 30: RESEARCH METHODS29% was white; 6% b
Page 31 and 32: RESEARCH METHODSfor several differe
Page 33 and 34: YOUNG PEOPLE’S ENTRY INTO THE YOU
Page 51 and 52: UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG
Page 73 and 74:
UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
PASSING THROUGH THE YOUTH JUSTICE S
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS6. Discus
Page 107 and 108:
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSdefendant
Page 109 and 110:
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSdifficult
Page 111 and 112:
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSFurther r
Page 113 and 114:
APPENDICES10- to 17-year-old popula
Page 115 and 116:
APPENDICES16s making up 23% of the
Page 117 and 118:
APPENDICESAppendix B:Tables of offe
Page 119 and 120:
APPENDICESCustody record dataTable
Page 121 and 122:
APPENDICESTable B7Area C custody re
Page 123 and 124:
APPENDICESAppendix C:YOT data sampl
Page 125 and 126:
APPENDICESTable C3ONS estimated 10-
Page 127 and 128:
APPENDICESTable C5Profile of crimes
Page 129 and 130:
APPENDICESTable C6 Profile of crime
Page 131 and 132:
APPENDICESTable C7aCase profile% Ma
Page 133 and 134:
APPENDICESTable C8Proportion of off
Page 135 and 136:
Table C10Proportion of disposals gi
Page 137 and 138:
Table C12Proportion of sentenced di
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix D:Multivariate logistic re
Page 141 and 142:
APPENDICESTable D3Model of prosecut
Page 143 and 144:
APPENDICESTable D6Model of dismissa
Page 145 and 146:
APPENDICESTable D8: Model of Remand
Page 147 and 148:
APPENDICESTable D10Asset sample, mo
Page 149 and 150:
APPENDICESTable D11Asset sample, mo
Page 151 and 152:
Table D13Model of community sentenc
Page 153 and 154:
APPENDICESTable D15 Model of custod
Page 155 and 156:
APPENDICESTable D17Length of custod
Page 157 and 158:
REFERENCESReferencesAudit Commissio
Page 159 and 160:
REFERENCESMirrlees-Black, C., Budd,
Page 161 and 162:
ContactsEnglandEquality and Human R
show all

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?