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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN THE YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEMThe overall aim of this study is to derive a better understanding of the ways in whichdifferent ethnic groups are treated within the youth justice system. To do this, it isessential to understand how the inflows into the system are created through policing,and how the youth justice system itself responds to these inflows.The objectives of the study were to:• examine how young suspects are drawn into the criminal justice system• assess whether the main ethnic groups are under-represented or overrepresented,relative to the local population, in these inflows• examine comprehensive data from YOTs on young people involved in the criminaljustice system, and make statistical comparisons between decisions made incases involving young people of different ethnic backgrounds• examine whether decision-making processes amplify, reduce or leave unchangedobserved differences between ethnic groups• investigate through interviews and observations the reasons why different groupsare under- or over-represented in the system, and• assess whether over-representation of some ethnic minority groups is likely to bea function of direct or indirect discrimination.1.5 The shape of this reportFollowing this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 describes our research methods.Chapter 3 presents results from the analysis of police stop and search figures,custody record statistics and observational data. The aim is to examine the extent towhich the police control the inflows of young offenders into the youth justice system.Chapter 4 takes a broader look at the relationship between the police and youngpeople, and the styles employed to police young people. It uses interview data withthe police and young people, and observations of the police. Chapter 5 analyses datafrom 12 Youth Offending Teams (YOTs), and broadly replicates the study of Feilzerand Hood (2004). The final chapter draws together findings and offers ourconclusions and recommendations.11
RESEARCH METHODS2. Research methodsThe research strategy combined quantitative and qualitative methods. First weexamined how much control the police were able to exert over the inflows into theyouth justice system. Then, largely replicating Feilzer and Hood’s (2004) study, weused Youth Offending Team (YOT) data to examine whether disproportionalitybetween ethnic groups was amplified or reduced as young offenders passed throughthe system. The policing element of the study was set in four Basic Command Units(BCUs) in three police forces. The three force areas were selected to reflect a goodgeographical spread throughout England and to represent at least one area wherethere was a significant black population and one area where there was a significantAsian population. YOT data covered 12 YOT areas (four of which included the BCUareas in the policing part of the study). Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) statisticswere collected from two YOT areas. There were problems with the CPS data,and for reasons explained below, these findings are not presented in this report.The research was carried out over a two-year period between 2007 and 2009,and had five core elements:1. Collection of stop and search data and custody records data from four 7 areas,to examine how young people are drawn into the youth justice system.2. Interviews with police officers and observations of police at work in five areas,to explore the relationship between the police and young people.3. Interviews with young people in two areas, to examine the impact of policing.4. An examination of the decision-making processes that take place at theprosecuting stage, through interviews with Senior Crown Prosecutors in twoof the areas, and analysis of CPS data.5. A quantitative examination of the case decisions of 12 YOTs, to examinedisproportionality and evidence of discrimination.2.1 Stop and search data and custody record collectionWe analysed stop and search data and custody records in four police areas whichfell within four of the 12 YOT areas (labelled A to L) selected for the study. 8 YOTs78We originally planned to cover five areas, but had to drop one area that could not provide data ina format comparable to the other four areas.An anonymised description of the areas chosen can be seen in Appendix A.12
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 and 22: INTRODUCTIONIn contrast, a MORI sel
Page 23 and 24: INTRODUCTIONexplanation is that you
Page 25: INTRODUCTIONin itself, if the socia
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 77 and 78:
UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG
Page 79 and 80:
UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG
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?