Differences in treatment and intervention needs of girls arrested for status versus criminal offenses

The purpose of this research was to explore the differences in factors associated with girls' status and criminal arrests. This study used data from six juvenile justice programs in multiple states, which was derived from the Juvenile Assessment and Intervention System (JAIS). The sample of 908 adolescent girls (ages 13-19) was ethnically and racially diverse (41% African American, 32% white, 12% Hispanic, 11% Native American and 4% Other). A structural equation model (SEM) was analyzed which tested the potential effects of adolescent substance use, truancy, suicidal ideation/attempt, self-harm, peer legal trouble, parental criminal history and parental and non-parental abuse on type of offense (status and criminal) and whether any of these relationships varied as a function of race/ethnicity. ^ Complex relationships emerged regarding both status and more serious criminal arrests. One of the most important findings was that distinct and different patterns of factors were associated with status arrests compared to criminal arrests. For example, truancy and parental abuse were directly associated with status offenses, whereas parental criminal history was directly related to criminal arrests. However, both status and criminal arrests shared common associations, including substance use, which signifies that certain variables are influential regarding both non-criminal and more serious crimes. In addition, significant meditating influences were observed which help to explain some underlying mechanisms involved in girls' arrest patterns. Finally, race/ethnicity moderated a key relationship, which has serious implications for treatment. ^ In conclusion, the present study is an important contribution to research regarding girls' delinquency in that it overcomes limitations in the existing literature in four primary areas: (1) it utilizes a large, multi-state, ethnically and racially diverse sample of justice system-involved girls, (2) it examines numerous co-occurring factors influencing delinquency from multiple domains (family, school, peers, etc.) simultaneously, (3) it formally examines race/ethnicity as a moderator of these multivariate relationships, and (4) it looks at status and criminal arrests independently in order to highlight possible differences in the patterning of risk factors associated with each. These findings have important implications for prevention, treatment and interventions with girls involved in the juvenile justice system.^

Human Security and Crime in Latin America: The political Capital and Political Impact of Criminal Groups and Belligerents Involved in Illicit Economies

Organized crime and illegal economies generate multiple threats to states and societies. But although the negative effects of high levels of pervasive street and organized crime on human security are clear, the relationships between human security, crime, illicit economies, and law enforcement are highly complex. By sponsoring illicit economies in areas of state weakness where legal economic opportunities and public goods are seriously lacking, both belligerent and criminal groups frequently enhance some elements of human security of the marginalized populations who depend on illicit economies for basic livelihoods. Even criminal groups without a political ideology often have an important political impact on the lives of communities and on their allegiance to the State. Criminal groups also have political agendas. Both belligerent and criminal groups can develop political capital through their sponsorship of illicit economies. The extent of their political capital is dependent on several factors. Efforts to defeat belligerent groups by decreasing their financial flows through suppression of an illicit economy are rarely effective. Such measures, in turn, increase the political capital of anti-State groups. The effectiveness of anti-money laundering measures (AML) also remains low and is often highly contingent on specific vulnerabilities of the target. The design of AML measures has other effects, such as on the size of a country’s informal economy. Multifaceted anti-crime strategies that combine law enforcement approaches with targeted socio-economic policies and efforts to improve public goods provision, including access to justice, are likely to be more effective in suppressing crime than tough nailed-fist approaches. For anti-crime policies to be effective, they often require a substantial, but politically-difficult concentration of resources in target areas. In the absence of effective law enforcement capacity, legalization and decriminalization policies of illicit economies are unlikely on their own to substantially reduce levels of criminality or to eliminate organized crime. Effective police reform, for several decades largely elusive in Latin America, is one of the most urgently needed policy reforms in the region. Such efforts need to be coupled with fundamental judicial and correctional systems reforms. Yet, regional approaches cannot obliterate the so-called balloon effect. If demand persists, even under intense law enforcement pressures, illicit economies will relocate to areas of weakest law enforcement, but they will not be eliminated.

Quantification of standards of proof thresholds in criminal and civil litigation

Standards of proof in law serve the purpose of instructing juries as to the expected levels of confidence in determinations of fact. In criminal trials, to reach a guilty verdict a jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, and in civil trials by a preponderance of the evidence. The purposes of this study are to determine the quantitative thresholds used to make these determinations; to ascertain the levels of juror agreement with basic principles of justice; and to try to predict thresholds and beliefs by juror personality characteristics. Participants read brief case descriptions and indicated thresholds in percentages, their beliefs in various principles, and completed three personality measures. A 92-94% threshold in criminal and an 80% threshold in civil matters was found; but prediction by personality was not supported. Significant percentages of jurors disavowed the presumptions of innocence and right to counsel.