African-American Youth in The Juvenile Justice System

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Huizinga and Elliott (1987) compared self-reported criminal behavior with official charges. They found that a slightly larger proportion of blacks reported involvement in general delinquency and that blacks and Hispanics reported more felony assaults than did whites. There were no consistent differences in rates of felony thefts. Among both nonserious and serious offenders, blacks were much more likely than whites to be arrested on a charge for an index offense. The racial differences could not be attributed to either the seriousness of the offense or to the frequency of offending. Despite the fact that police tend to concentrate patrols in poor neighborhoods, they also appear to respond more slowly to client calls from inner-city residents than in more affluent neighborhoods (Bachman, 1996). In addition, inner-city black residents distrust the largely white police (Anderson, 1997; Russell, 1998) and believe the police are unlikely to be available when they are most needed (Pinderhughes, 1999). Many residents therefore believe that they must defend themselves. TABLE 6-3 Prediction of Juvenile Arrest in Police Encounters Odds of Arrest All Encounters with Juvenile Suspects (N = 612) Police Initiated Cases Only (N = 319) Male (vs. female) 2.08* 2.63 2.33 3.85* 8.33* 7.69* Minority (vs. white) 1.43 1.27 1.19 3.27* 2.22 2.09 Crime serious (vs. 1.95* 1.93* 2.558* 2.59* not) Evidence (vs. none) 6.11* 5.82* 12.81* 12.19* Disrespect (vs. 2.17 1.46 none) * p
1), and placement (7 of 7). Adjudication reveals a different pattern, with only one of the studies showing disparity and three not showing disparity. In one of the largest studies of this topic undertaken so far, Frazier and Bishop (1995) analyzed data from all cases referred to juvenile justice intake units (N = 137,028) in Florida between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 1987. Frazier and Bishop looked at processing at four points— intake (case closure versus formal processing), detention (detention versus release), court referral (prosecutor files petition versus no petition filed), and judicial disposition (community treatment versus residential facilities or transferred to criminal court). In simple bivariate analyses, Frazier and Bishop found that nonwhites were more likely than whites to be (1) referred by intake for formal processing, (2) held in secure detention facilities, and (3) petitioned to court by prosecutors. However, in trying to interpret findings regarding racial disproportionality, it is commonly recognized that analyses need to control for certain factors that influence the decision-making process. For example, the seriousness of a crime obviously affects the decision-making process. Similarly, a youth's prior record would be something that judges and others involved in the decision-making process might take into account. Other factors about the life circumstances of the juvenile, such as living with a single parent or school failure, may also influence the decision about how to handle a juvenile. Thus, analyses need to control for some of these factors to better reveal the importance of race or ethnicity in the disproportionality. As indicated in Table 6-4, only a few studies include controls for important covariates. Using this more rigorous test of the disproportionality hypothesis involving multivariate analyses, Frazier and Bishop (1995) found that being nonwhite significantly increased the likelihood of an intake decision of formal processing, despite controls for gender, age, prior record, offense severity, and contempt status. Being nonwhite did not seem to affect decisions at other points in the process. Waiver to Adult Courts In an analysis of transfer decisions in Boston, Detroit, Newark, and Phoenix, Fagan et al. (1987a) found that blacks were 75 percent more likely to be waived to criminal court than whites (1.4 versus 0.8 percent of cases, respectively). Juveniles who were older at the time of the offense, juveniles with an earlier age of delinquency onset, and juveniles charged with murder were most often transferred. Although Fagan et al. (1987a) found that minority juveniles were transferred more often, race was not a statistically independent influence on the decision to transfer. However, these authors suggested that race may indirectly affect transfer decisions through factors such as dress, demeanor, quality of defense representation, verbal abilities of the minor, and status in the community. Podkopacz and Feld (1995, 1996) closely scrutinized court processing variables and reported no race effects in waiver decisions after appropriate controls were added. In contrast, the General Accounting Office (1995) reported substantial racial effects when Page 63 of 114
Page 2 and 3:
Turning the Improbable Into the Exc
Page 4 and 5:
Page 4 of 114
Page 6 and 7:
Page 6 of 114
Page 8 and 9:
6. 1 We disseminate Quarterly publi
Page 10 and 11:
Page 10 of 114
Page 12 and 13: death their hostility. 17 He came a
Page 14 and 15: Page 14 of 114
Page 18 and 19: eceive the death penalty. Early deb
Page 20 and 21: punishment. The increased ease in t
Page 22 and 23: According to the Office of Juvenile
Page 24 and 25: Proposed Reforms Many scholars stre
Page 26 and 27: Boston, youth court is available to
Page 28 and 29: Types of Incarceration Some inmates
Page 30 and 31: populations relative to their repre
Page 32 and 33: unrelated to crime rates. That is,
Page 34 and 35: targeted media campaign to shift pu
Page 36 and 37: Promoting Alternatives: The JDAI Mo
Page 38 and 39: Nationally, the youth rate of incar
Page 40 and 41: The percentage of black arrests and
Page 42 and 43: Working with Police The OJJDP data
Page 44 and 45: Next, the County Attorney's staff w
Page 48 and 49: Both selective inattention (ignorin
Page 50 and 51: FIGURE 6-1 Involvement of juveniles
Page 52 and 53: comparable across states, and analy
Page 54 and 55: assault (51 percent for NCVS and 57
Page 56 and 57: FIGURE 6-2 Child risk indicators by
Page 58 and 59: lack youth. The next section examin
Page 60 and 61: one of the few studies of black cit
Page 64 and 65: controlling only for present offens
Page 66 and 67: of their sentences (Carroll and Mon
Page 68 and 69: whites. The relative risk for a bla
Page 70 and 71: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Ove
Page 72 and 73: Gase, one of the study’s authors,
Page 74 and 75: The Cook County, Illinois, Dispropo
Page 76 and 77: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania redu
Page 78 and 79: Break Down Language Barriers Even t
Page 82 and 83: Notes _____________________________
Page 86 and 87: African American Youth and the Juve
Page 88 and 89: Attachment B Minority Youth in The
Page 90 and 91: Minority Youth in the Juvenile Just
Page 92 and 93: 4 In t r o d u c t i o n Minority y
Page 94 and 95: 6 the community’s service provisi
Page 96 and 97: 8 In Iowa, a Youth Race and Detenti
Page 98 and 99: 10 References Arizona Juvenile Just
Page 100 and 101: The National Conference of State Le
Page 102 and 103: Attachment C Racial Disparities in
Page 104 and 105: POLICY BRIEF: RACIAL DISPARITIES IN
Page 112 and 113:
POLICY BRIEF: RACIAL DISPARITIES IN
Page 114 and 115:
APPENDIX C. POLICY BRIEF: RACIAL DI
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Advocacy Foundation Publishers Page
Page 122 and 123:
Issue Title Quarterly Vol. I 2015 T
Page 124 and 125:
Issue Title Quarterly Vol. V 2019 O
Page 126 and 127:
LI Nonprofit Confidentiality In The
Page 128 and 129:
Vol. XVIII 2032 Public Policy LXXVI
Page 130 and 131:
Racial Profiling June 2019 … Page
Page 132 and 133:
The e-Advocate Journal of Theologic
Page 134 and 135:
Issue Title Quarterly Vol. I 2015 I
Page 136 and 137:
The e-Advocate Juvenile Justice Rep
Page 138 and 139:
2018 - The Theological Law Firm Aca
Page 140 and 141:
Page 111 of 114
Page 142 and 143:
www.TheAdvocacyFoundation.org Page
show all

African-American Youth in The Juvenile Justice System

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?