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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT IN THE YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEM4.2 Adversarial policing/street controlThis style of policing emphasises the control and management of those who policeofficers believe to be most heavily involved in offending. It focuses simultaneously oncrime control and on the assertion of control over those who pose a challenge topolice authority. It is prevalent in high crime areas, but as we shall see, it is not theonly style of policing adopted in such areas. Where offending is concentrated – orbelieved to be concentrated – among particular groups, there is a tendency for thesegroups to attract differential police treatment.Stop and search tends to be enthusiastically embraced by officers adopting this typeof policing. Not surprisingly, given that the rationale is to demonstrate control over thestreets, the same small group of people who challenge police authority tend to be thefocus of police action. We formed the clear impression that in these areas the policepersistently stopped the same groups of young people, who were often known tothem by name. This style of policing tends neither to foster – nor to value – goodrelations with those who are policed in this way.4.3 Rule of law/procedural justiceWe observed adversarial styles of policing, to greater or lesser extent, in all fourareas, but few officers were committed exclusively to adversarial tactics. Officers inall four areas also exercised, to a greater or lesser degree, a more consensual styleof policing designed to secure greater commitment to the rule of law throughstrategies that valued procedural justice. Procedural justice entails treating all thoseinvolved in police interactions with decency and respect, and according to the rulesset out in law and in codes of practice (Tyler and Huo, 2002; Tyler, 2003, 2007;Jackson et al., 2009 in press). The ‘rule of law’ policing that we observed tended tobe characterised by:• strong leadership• good internal monitoring of arrests and stop and search encounters, and• placing value on a positive relationship with local residents and young people.This style of policing was particularly prevalent in Area C1, where we observed auniformed response team and a specialist young person’s inspector conducting a39
UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG PEOPLEreprimand and final warning clinic. However, rule of law policing was also found in allthe neighbourhood policing teams we observed.4.4 Reactive styles of policingThe two styles of policing in the lower quadrants of Figure 4.1, reciprocator/avoiderand responsive/service, both encompass styles of policing that are on the reactiveend of the continuum; they differ, of course, in the emphasis they place on personalor professional relationships with the public. Some teams that we observed, however(especially those in Areas B1 and D1), placed considerably less emphasis onproactive contact with young people than Areas A1 and C1. Given that the aim of ourobservations was to capture the varying ways in which the police interacted withyoung people, these areas feature to a lesser degree than Areas A1 and C1 in thecase studies presented below.Reactive styles of policing can be characterised either by personalised orprofessional relationships with the public. Styles of policing which were bothreactive and personalised figured little in this study. Some teams and some individualofficers were clearly much less interventionist than others, some to a degree that wasreminiscent of Muir’s ‘avoider’ category. However we encountered few‘reciprocators’, a style of policing that is probably more characteristic of officers inlow-crime areas where police are deeply embedded in areas with very homogeneouspopulations. However, we frequently observed interactions with the public whichwere both reactive and handled in a highly professional manner, in ways consistentwith principles of procedural justice.4.5 Case studies: varieties of police engagementThe adversarial style was particularly prevalent within certain teams in Area A1, ourbusy inner-city area, where the relationship between the police and young blackpeople was shaped by a history of friction, dating back at least to the early 1980s. InArea A1, adversarial policing was adopted by the two teams of specialist officerswhose remit was to disrupt the illegal activities of young people and to be seen totake command of the local area. It was not, however, a style adopted by Area A1’slocal neighbourhood policing team (whom we also observed): their style focusedmore on consensual, responsive policing.40
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 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 53: UNDERSTANDING THE POLICING OF YOUNG
Page 81 and 82: PASSING THROUGH THE YOUTH JUSTICE S
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?