Evaluation of the Airdrie Sheriff Youth Court Pilot

A pilot Youth Court was introduced at Airdrie Sheriff Court in June 2004. Its objectives were to: • reduce the frequency and seriousness of re-offending by 16 and 17 year old offenders, particularly persistent offenders (and some 15 year olds who are referred to the court); • promote the social inclusion, citizenship and personal responsibility of these young offenders while maximising their potential; • establish fast track procedures for those young persons appearing before the Youth Court; • enhance community safety, by reducing the harm caused to individual victims of crime and providing respite to those communities which are experiencing high levels of crime; and • test the viability and usefulness of a Youth Court using existing legislation and to demonstrate whether legislative and practical improvements might be appropriate. An evaluation of the pilot commissioned by the Scottish Executive found that it appeared in many respects to be working well. It was a tightly run court that dealt with a heavy volume of business. With its fast track procedures and additional resources it was regarded as a model to be aspired to in all summary court business. Whether a dedicated Youth Court was required or whether procedural improvements would have been possible in the absence of dedicated resources and personnel was, however, more difficult to assess. Two issues in particular required further attention. First, consideration needed to be given to whether the Youth Court should be more explicitly youth focused and what this might entail. Second, greater clarity was required regarding for whom the Youth Court was intended to avoid the risk of net-widening and its consequences for young people.

Evaluation of the Hamilton Youth Court Pilot 2003-2005

Pilot Youth Courts were introduced at Hamilton Sheriff Court in June 2003 and at Airdrie Sheriff Court in June 2004. Although introduced as one of a number of measures aimed at responding more effectively to youth crime (including young people dealt with through the Children’s Hearings System), the Youth Courts were intended for young people who would otherwise have been dealt with in the adult Sheriff Summary Court. The objectives of the pilot Youth Courts were to: • reduce the frequency and seriousness of re-offending by 16 and 17 year old offenders, particularly persistent offenders (and some 15 year olds who are referred to the court); • promote the social inclusion, citizenship and personal responsibility of these young offenders while maximising their potential; • establish fast track procedures for those young persons appearing before the Youth Court; • enhance community safety, by reducing the harm caused to individual victims of crime and providing respite to those communities which are experiencing high levels of crime; and • test the viability and usefulness of a Youth Court using existing legislation and to demonstrate whether legislative and practical improvements might be appropriate. Evaluation of the Hamilton and Airdrie Sheriff Youth Court pilots suggested that they had been successful in meeting the objectives set for them by the Youth Court Feasibility Group. Both were tightly run courts that dealt with a heavy volume of business. The particular strengths of the Youth Court model over previous arrangements included the fast-tracking of young people to and through the court, the reduction in trials, the availability of a wider range of resources and services for young people and ongoing judicial review. The successful operation of the pilot Youth Courts was dependent upon effective teamwork among the relevant agencies and professionals concerned. Good information sharing, liaison and communication appeared to exist across agencies and the procedures that were in place to facilitate the sharing of information seemed to be working well. This was also facilitated by the presence of dedicated staff within agencies, resulting in clear channels of communication, and in the opportunity provided by the multi-agency Implementation Groups to identify and address operational issues on an ongoing basis. However, whether Youth Courts are required in Scotland or whether procedural improvement were possible in the absence of dedicated resources and personnel was more difficult to assess. Two issues in particular required further attention. First, consideration needed to be given to whether the Youth Courts should be more explicitly youth focused and what this might entail. Second, greater clarity was required regarding for whom the Youth Courts were intended. This suggested the need for further discussion of Youth Court targeting and its potential consequences among the various agencies concerned.

The politicization of youth crime in Scotland and the rise of the 'Burberry Court'

In 2003, the youth justice system in Scotland entered a new phase with the introduction of a pilot youth court. The processing of persistent 16 and 17 year old (and serious 15 year olds) represented a stark deviation from a ‘child centred’ and needs-oriented state apparatus for dealing with young offenders to one based on deeds and individual responsibility. This article, based on an evaluation funded by the Scottish Executive, is the first to provide a critical appraisal of this youth justice reform. It examines the views of the judiciary and young offenders and reveals that the pilot youth court in Scotland represents a punitive excursion that poses serious concerns for due process, human rights and net widening.

Pre-sentence Report, Magisterial Discourse and Agency in Youth Courts in England

This article draws on interviews with Youth Court magistrates to examine if and how discourses, strategies and technologies of risk governance have affected Youth Court magistrates in England and Wales. The aim of the article is to detail the complex relationship between magisterial agency in decision making and youth justice policies which focus on risk control and management. The article demonstrates that, contrary to what might be assumed from the youth and risk governance theoretical literature, Youth Offending Team risk assessments form only one part of the information used by magistrates to explain young people’s presence in courts. This article concludes that magisterial decision making is framed not by formal, expert assessments of risk, but by magistrates’ claims that they are ‘knowing outsiders’, who through judicious use of information presented to them and their own life experiences are able to make objective judgements about both the risk assessments authored by Youth Offending Teams and the young lawbreakers before them.

An Examination of Youth Perceptions and Understandings of their Experiences with Extrajudicial Sanctions in Relation to Key Principles of the YCJA

It is unclear how the principles of meaningful consequences, fair and proportionate accountability, and rehabilitation and reintegration under the Youth Criminal Justice Act (2003) are understood and experienced by youth participating in diversion from youth court. Interviews with 20 youth revealed that, from their understanding, extrajudicial sanctions were viewed as accomplishing the goals of meaningful consequences and fair and proportionate accountability relatively well, but less emphasis was placed on rehabilitation and reintegration. The findings suggest that there may be a need an examination of the spectrum of responses available to youth under the umbrella of Extrajudicial Sanctions and their ability to achieve the key principles of the legislation. Implications for both youth and policy are addressed.

Punição e controle: o “caminho punitivo” do jovem autor de ato infracional em Fortaleza - CE

This research aims to analyze the punitive pathway taken by youth for committing acts of offense in Fortaleza, capital city of Ceará, in Brazil. Therefore, we focus the analysis in institutions that mark the beginning of punitive “institutionalization” of youth in the city, such as the Child and Adolescent Specialized Police Precinct, the Luis Barros Montenegro Shelter Unit, the Public Prosecutor’s Office for Childhood and Youth, and the Child and Youth Court. Ethnography and semi-structured interviews were used as methodological tools to approach the research subjects and relevant places for the research, seeking to highlight their punitive perspective. As a result, we find that the punishment and control imposed in such loci are an extension of the punishment and control used against these same youths in society. Considering that the analyzed institutions exist in society and are composed by its members, they do not surpass the perspective of repression, control and punishment carried out towards a segment of the population, especially towards those that Souza (2011; 2012) called “subcitizens”.

The Youth Commission act and related materials classified to Illinois revised statutes, 1957, Illinois Attorney General's Opinions, 1953- 1957, and Illinois Supreme Court Reports.

Mode of access: Internet.

Juvenile Waivers to Adult Court: A Review of Outcomes for Youth, March 2011

This study followed four cohorts of youth in an effort to determine the impact of waiving youth from the juvenile courts to the adult justice system. The four cohorts included a group of youth who were automatically processed in the adult system due to the severity of the charges against them, a group waived to the adult system after starting in the juvenile court, a group returned to the juvenile court after having initially been waived to the adult system, and a group of “youthful offenders” who started supervision in the juvenile court with the option of moving into the adult system upon reaching age 18.

Review of 'Laying Down the Criminal Law : A Handbook for Youth Workers'

This third edition of Laying down the criminal law: A handbook for youth workers is essential to understanding young people’s experiences with criminal justice in Queensland. The text comprises detailed scenarios of situations where a young person would have contact with the system, and young people ‘in trouble’ (for example, being excluded from school). The text discusses how workers support the young person in talking to police, going to court, or being a victim of crime. One scenario notes how a youth worker responds to 15 year old Stephen staying at a youth shelter after leaving home and having contact with police. Scenarios are supplemented with information about confidentiality and negligence, and how workers consider these concepts supporting young people...

Submission to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee - Youth Justice (Boot Camp Orders) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012

This submission addresses the Youth Justice (Boot Camp Orders) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 which has as its objectives (1) the introduction of a Boot Camp Order as an option instead of detention for young offenders and (2) the removal of the option of court referred youth justice conferencing for young offenders. As members of the QUT Faculty of Law Centre for Crime and Justice we welcome the invitation to participate in the discussion of these issues which are critically important to the Queensland community at large but especially to our young people.

Submission to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill

This submission addresses the Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 the objectives of which are to: 1. Permit repeat offenders’ identifying information to be published and open the Children’s Court for youth justice matters involving repeat offenders; 2. Create a new offence where a child commits a further offence while on bail; 3. Permit childhood findings of guilt for which no conviction was recorded to be admissible in court when sentencing a person for an adult offence; 4. Provide for the automatic transfer from detention to adult corrective services facilities of 17 year olds who have six months or more left to serve in detention; 5. Provide that, in sentencing any adult or child for an offence punishable by imprisonment, the court must not have regard to any principle, whether under statute or at law, that a sentence of imprisonment (in the case of an adult) or detention (in the case of a child) should only be imposed as a last resort; 6. Allow children who have absconded from Sentenced Youth Boot Camps to be arrested and brought before a court for resentencing without first being given a warning; and 7. Make a technical amendment to the Youth Justice Act 1992.

Making the fun stop : youth justice reform in Queensland

In 2013 the newly elected conservative Liberal National Party government instigated amendments to the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld). Boot camps replaced court ordered youth justice conferencing. In 2014 there were more drastic changes, including opening the Children’s Court proceedings to the public, permitting publication of identifying information of repeat offenders, removing the principle of ‘detention as a last resort’, facilitating prompt transferral of 17 year olds to adult prisons and instigating new bail offences and mandatory boot camp orders for recidivist motor vehicle offenders in Townsville. This article compares these amendments to the legislative frameworks in other jurisdictions and current social research. It argues that these amendments are out of step with national and international best practice benchmarks for youth justice. Early indications are that Indigenous children are now experiencing increased rates of unsentenced remand. The article argues that the government’s policy initiatives are resulting in negative outcomes and that early and extensive evaluations of these changes are essential.

The impact of the juvenile intervention facility on the adjudication of delinquent youth in Broward County

Considerable funds have been allocated in the area of juvenile justice in attempts to reduce and prevent the problem of juvenile delinquency. Much of these funds have been funneled to various community-level intervention programs. This dissertation reports the results of a study that examined the effects of one such program, the Juvenile Intervention Facility (JIF) in Broward County, Florida, on reducing the number of cases handled judicially by the Juvenile Court in that county. ^ Juvenile justice policy, which precipitated the creation of the JIF program, assumed that more structured and integrative efforts at the point of entry into the juvenile justice system would lead to greater diversion from the courts to much needed intervention services. By virtue of this process, the number of juveniles handled judicially by the courts was expected to decrease and future delinquent behavior would be prevented. Archival data from four fiscal years were examined, two years pre-JIF, two years post-JIF, a third-year follow-up, and a concurrent outcome measure corresponding to the first year of JIF operations. Data included all juvenile cases referred during the fiscal years defined for Broward and St. Lucie Counties, the state of Florida, and the United States. The study tested four hypotheses: (a) the JIF would reduce the number of cases handled judicially in Broward County Juvenile Court, (b) the decrease in judicially handled cases would be greater for females than for males, (c) there would be greater decreases in judicially handled cases for whites than non-whites, (d) there would be greater decreases in judicial handling for younger than older offenders. Bivariate analyses were conducted, consisting of chi square tests, to test the hypotheses. ^ Results indicate that the impact of the JIF was in the opposite direction of what was expected in that more juvenile offenders were handled judicially through juvenile court. This fact points to the possibility that the JIF has failed to provide the intended consequences of the policy. In the discussion, these “unintended” consequences are addressed in the context of juvenile justice policy creation and the competing constituencies involved in such policy development. ^