juvenile justice
-
Supreme Court and Juvenile Life Sentences
-
Five Supreme Court Cases to Watch
-
Suburban Gangs: Overreported or Misunderstood?
A Community Option for Alabama Juveniles
Published October 27, 2009 @ 03:24PM PT
It was the tough-on-crime, war on drugs 1970s and 1980s. America feared a dangerous outbreak in juvenile crime, and lawmakers cracked down -- passing legislation to ensure that kids were incarcerated for breaking the law -- even if they were non-violent first-time offenders.
Alabama's prison system grew faster than the rest of country during the tough-on-crime years, but not by much. From 1977 to 2000 Alabama prisons grew by 373%, compared to 364% for the country as a whole. We were all swept up in the hysteria.
Well, things are definitely changing, in Alabama and elsewhere. Last year, Alabama legislators passed laws requiring judges to choose community sentences and other alternatives to incarceration for non-violent juvenile offenders. This means kids who make a mistake might have a chance to stay with their families, stay in school, get some special training -- the opportunities that research shows actually prevents crime later in life.
Fighting to Save Juvenile Life Without Parole
Published October 20, 2009 @ 10:30AM PT
The Heritage Foundation is worried that the playing field isn’t level in our criminal justice system. Juveniles sentenced to life without parole have the upper hand, the group says in a new paper, and the “activists” who oppose juvenile LWOP are threatening to take away this uniquely American punishment.
In a defensive, pro-punishment paper released this summer and by the conservative think tank, authors Andrew Grossman and Charles Stimson argue that its fine for the U.S. to be the only country with juvenile life without parole because we have a uniquely serious teen crime problem. They complain that irresponsible activists have monopolized the debate in favor of giving teens a second chance, and suggest that an important tool to “express society’s disapproval” of heinous crimes is in danger.
Fixing the Information Mismatch in Juvenile Justice
Published October 12, 2009 @ 06:53AM PT
In 2007. I met a soft-spoken young man whom we will call “Ivan.” Almost everyday, he wore a large sweatshirt with cats and dogs on it. When I asked him if he liked animals, his face lit up and he told me that his dream was to become a veterinarian. He really loved taking care of animals, he said, and he was especially good with dogs.
I knew Ivan because he was in the Bronx Family Court on a delinquency proceeding for allegedly throwing water on his teacher’s laptop at school. Ivan said it was an accident, although his teacher didn’t think so. While awaiting a finding in his case, Ivan was successfully attending Saturday community service events, he was going to his counseling appointments, and he was present at school when his probation officer checked on him. Unfortunately, Ivan’s mom didn’t quite have her act together, so Ivan would find himself breaking up fights between her and her boyfriend, or taking care of her when she was too high to do it herself. Eventually, the court recognized that Ivan’s mom was not in a position to mother him as required by law. Without other family members or friends to take him in, Ivan was put into a juvenile jail to await the finding in his case.
There are many, many sad elements of this story, but I want to focus on the lack of understanding that Ivan and his mom had about his court proceeding. Indeed, in a recent report recommending improvements to New York City’s alternative-to-detention (ATD) programs, prepared by the Youth Justice Board at the Center for Court Innovation, the youth authors note a key finding: young people and their families often lack sufficient and necessary information to participate meaningfully in juvenile delinquency cases. The board members – who spent more than five months interviewing over 30 policymakers and practitioners, conducting site visits to New York City’s ATD programs, and leading focus groups with system-involved young people – found three important factors in this information gap.
First, the young people surveyed said that they never received a clear explanation of how the juvenile justice system works or how their actions could affect their case outcomes. Second, this confusion about the complicated legal process made young people very cautious about accepting advice on difficult decisions from their lawyers. Without knowing why their lawyers would be talking to judges or other people in the courtroom, the youth suspected that these adults were, in fact, working against them. Likewise, lawyers said that communication barriers – and the difficulty of reaching young people by phone – undermined their ability to properly represent their clients. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, parents and family members had no idea how much impact their actions have on judges’ decisions about whether to release or remand (incarcerate) their children. While judges expect parents to attend all court dates, parents do not know this, nor are they always able to miss work for their children’s court hearings, which can drag on for months. Knowing how much stress they are causing their parents, many youth are hesitant (and feel poorly equipped) to explain their cases to their parents.
The Youth Justice Board has made some simple and excellent suggestions for how to solve this problem: once they have been arrested, young people should be provided with informational materials that diagram what the process will look like, offer tips for best outcomes, explain their rights, and define key terms they will hear. Youth and their families should also have access to somebody – not their lawyer – who can answer all of these questions in person, in court. Additionally, lawyers should use plain language to explain their role and to specify what information they can and cannot share with other court players. And finally, the young people themselves should do their best to show up for their court dates on time and make sure their lawyers have up-to-date information (like a recent school success) that will help their case in court. These are all steps that juvenile justice systems nationwide can implement reasonably and in short order. Fulfilling the promise of justice for young people like Ivan is not something that can wait.
For more information about the Youth Justice Board, you can listen to a podcast with the program coordinator and some of the board members themselves here: http://www.courtinnovation.org/Podcasts/yjb.mp3
Take Action for Juvenile Justice
Published September 10, 2009 @ 07:14AM PT
This week marks the 35th anniversary of the U.S. Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA), which provides federal funding to states that comply with a set of best practices aimed at avoiding the institutionalization of children convicted of crimes.
It's a good law, and it's up for reauthorization this year. If you believe more resources should be devoted to juvenile justice systems and alternatives to incarceration, send your representatives a letter today urging them to strengthen the JJDPA. I'll tell you why I think this is important below.
New PSA: Educate Us, Or Else
Published September 09, 2009 @ 05:00AM PT
A new PSA from an education advocacy campaign puts kids in prison to paint a stark picture of the high costs we pay for failing to fix our public education system. An elementary-age boy stands at the center of this shiny video in an orange prison jumpsuit, telling viewers that states use third-grade reading test scores to predict future prison growth (not true, more below), and that a million kids drop out of high school each year, and those kids are eight times more likely to go to prison (possibly true, more below).
It's a stark image and powerful call for education reform from the Rethink Learning Now campaign, and it's worth a watch. It would be better, however, if its math wasn't so fuzzy.
Life Without Parole Is Not The Answer
Published August 25, 2009 @ 05:45PM PT
Human Trafficking blogger Amanda Kloer has the story today of Sara Kruzan, who was sentenced to life without parole ten years ago in California for killing her abusive pimp when she was 16. She was forced to work as a child prostitute for three years, and she finally retaliated, killing the man who had controlled her and raped her regularly since she was 13.
Her case is a clear example of our horribly misguided (and overused) life without parole sentences for juveniles. Not only was she young and abused when she was sentenced to LWOP, but she killed a man who abused her for years – possibly making it a case of battered person syndrome.
Both her age at the time of the crime and the suffering she had endured should have qualified her for a more reasonable sentence.
And like many people in prison – and especially those sent away as kids – she has changed behind bars and feels that spending the rest of life locked up would be a terrible waste.
“I have a lot of good to offer,” she says in a heartbreaking video interview from prison (watch it after the jump). “The person who I am today at 29, I could set a positive example. I’m very determined to show that no matter what you’ve done, or where you’ve come from, or what you’ve experienced in life, it’s up to you to change,”
Monday Map: Abuse in Juvenile Jails
Published August 24, 2009 @ 05:00PM PT
Today's map, from the Syracuse Post-Standard and the AP, breaks down nearly 13,000 claims of abuse in juvenile detention centers across the U.S. between 2004 and 2007. Only 10% of these claims are substantiated, and surely false claims are common. But I would guess that unsubstantiated true claims are fairly common, as well. Rather than reading too much into false claims, however, I'm just looking at state-by-state claims. And it's no surprise that Texas and New York are in the 600+ category.
