Arrests- While law enforcement departments releasing the juvenile arrest data that they have made, it has helped people look and see how the juvenile justice system is performing and functioning. Practitioners use this data to further evaluate the effectiveness of the delinquency prevention and intervention programs, and the reentry programs. This data can provide an effective way of changing the juvenile offending patters. It can also see if there is any bias to some youth and their races. Overall in 2011 the arrest rate is down eleven percent from 2010 and thirty-one percent since the year of 2002. In 2011 juvenile arrest rates are at their lowest levels in thirty years, many states and communities are trying legislation, new policies, and different practice changes to reduce the amount of juvenile arrest rates even further. There have been new amounts of evidence lately that connects the effects of being involved with the criminal justice system and confinement. These health concerns are there adolescent emotional, mental, behavioral, and their social development as well. So many agencies are developing ways to divert the none serious offenders from even entering the system in the first place. Eventually if this system works, this should result in a new system where arrest of juveniles is rare, all the youth are treated fairly, and if they do enter the juvenile system they will receive much needed treatment and services. This could be a new outcome for youths that are positive for their health, their families, and even the comminutes they live in. The arrest statics that are counted to even have the information for these ideas are coming from the UCR (Uniform Crime Reporting). This is gathered form all law enforcement agencies from the local level to the federal level. It shows the amount of arrests that were made by law enforcement agencies in that specific year. But there is a slight problem with this way of gathering the data. It only shows the amount of people arrested, not the number of crimes committed. If a person committed ten burglaries and are arrested. It only shows the arrest for that one person, not all the crimes that were committed. In a situation, though were one crime is committed and there are many arrests made, it only shows the number of juveniles arrested for that one crime. Juveniles are more likely to commit crimes in groups than adults are. So, there is two ways you can look at the statics. One more draw back about this system is that the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) requires law enforcement agencies to classify an arrest by the most serious offense charged in that arrest. So, a juvenile could get charged with aggravated assault and possession of a weapon. But the arrest would be reported to the FBI as just being charged with aggravated assault, because aggravated assault is a higher more serious crime than possession of a weapon. So, when the FBI shows that in 2011 28,200 arrests of juveniles for a weapon law violation. This means that the weapon law violation was the worst offense. You do not know any of the other charges the person could have had. Trojan 65,Cavs123
I don't really agree that it helps show how well the juvenile justice system is preforming. How can arrest records decipher the difference between success and failure in the system? I don't believe they provide the information to acknowledge or deny the facts. It doesn't tell us if the police are still policing the way they did _____ years ago and if there are more or less juveniles committing crimes. Also arrest records do not show if there is bias towards races of youths. There could be a higher population of Asian kids than whites in Alaska so therefore there is a greater chance that one of them would be more likely to get arrested. This is common sense due to the fact that normally the higher population of a certain race in an area then they are more likely to get arrested. Theoretically the more people you have in area then the more people of that classification will be committing crimes and getting arrested. If we look at Ferguson, MO there is a much higher population of blacks than whites (something like 70% to 20%) and there are more blacks arrested because there are more blacks committing crimes. So we can't really say that arrest records show bias unless there is a new system that takes everything into account. Fireboy123, NDIrish123
I completely agree with you when you say that if this system works and can result in a newer system where the juvenile arrests are getting rarer, children are being treated equally, and juveniles are receiving the treatment that is there for them and the services are provided correctly that it would be beneficial. It would definitely be healthier for the youth to not be in the environments that they are in and being influenced to commit crimes. The families could benefit in a way I don't think many realize. There are some families that cannot afford to put their children in programs so some parents might appreciate the law taking their children and forcing them to participate in these program and see what else is out in the world other than committing crimes. Communities would definitely feel safer knowing that these children are being taken off the streets and are receiving some type of help. I would also add in that if intervention was done earlier and not after they are in the adult system then our adult population could also be seeing less crimes committed. Sunshine 123 & UofM123
I kind of agree with you, I feel like the arrest system only showed part of the data. They stop recording some data because they ratings wasn’t that high but I still feel like all crimes should be recorded because even though it’s not that important it’s still happening that people would want that type of information. That part I agree with the most is that they should be putting these kids in programs. Sometimes the parents have a hard time controlling their child and might need a little more help and by the law helping with that, it can make the child better or even make the rates or data decrease. There will not be as much crimes because they are putting these kids away from the things they are doing.-babyblue123
Cases Waived- All the fifty states have mechanisms to handle juveniles in the court system. All the states have established an upper age of original jurisdiction for the juvenile courts, these ages are 15, 16, or 17. This is all depends on state to state. Also, states have also made laws that allow juveniles younger than the upper age of the juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults. These are only made though with very serious crimes being committed, like murder for example. There are basic types of transfer laws. One of the first ones is concurrent jurisdiction laws, “allow prosecutors discretion on whether they file a case in juvenile or criminal court.” The next is statutory exclusion laws, “Grant criminal courts original jurisdiction over certain classes of cases involving juveniles.” Judicial waiver laws are, “they authorize or require juvenile court judges to remove certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults in criminal court.” For every one-thousand delinquency cases in the United States, only four were waved to criminal court. In 2011, the juvenile jurisdiction of the courts handled more than 1.2 million cases dealing with child delinquency. More than half of those case, exactly 54%, were handed formally. This means that a petition was filled requesting a waiver hearing. Of all the petitioned delinquency cases, only one percent resulted in judicial wavering. The number of judicially waived person offense cases increase 204% between the years of 1985 and 1994. Then it fell juristically between the years of 1994 and 2001. This fell 44% from the peak in 1994. But between the years of 2001 and 2008 the number of cases waived went up by 19%. Then it declined again in the years between 2008 and 2001 by 33%. I believe that it fell like this because the staff of the time might have had different views. Also, the times between these years was a major turning point in our society morally. Just like the 9/11 attack effected the whole nation and forever will. This is part of that change in society. By comparison to his. Waived drug offenses peaked in 1998 481% greater than the year of 1985. Between this peak year of 1998 and 2001, these amount of waived drug offenses declined by 59%. I believe the reason behind this juristic decline was because a lot of law enforcement agencies during this time and still going on today. Really started to crack down on drug usage with the people. Throughout the years of 1985 and 2011 in almost every case. Males where found more likely to be judicially waived to criminal court than females were. Why is this? I believe the reasoning behind this is because there is a lot of discrepancy in the courts. If a female was waived to criminal court over a male more than people would complain that females are getting scrutinized and treated unfair in the courts. Also, I think another reason behind this is because judges look at a female and see them at less of a risk than a male. Trojan65,Cavs123
What is the reason you think that drug offenses that were waived declined? You didn't finish the sentence. I am going to assume you meant to say that courts began to strike down on drug cases. Well if that were the case then wouldn't the number of cases waived have increased?? I also don't agree with saying that 9/11 had anything to do with the waived cases for juveniles. The only thing I could picture this being accurate about is that maybe juvenile courts did not want to flood the adult courts with cases while we began prosecuting terrorists. As if we sent more cases to adult court then less money would be available to prosecute terrorists. Maybe also the fact that juvenile courts were not willing to send more kids to adult court because during this time our courts needed to be wide open to ensure quick and torturous punishment to terrorists. There are a billion theories as to what may have been the cause of waived cases decreasing and increasing, but we can all agree that we will never know 100%. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
I disagree with you when you say that males were found more likely to be judicially waived to criminal court over females. As an overall statement I believe this is wrong. In the article it stated that both females and males followed the same pattern in general offenses. Maybe the difference or more specific topic that you were trying to get at was that in 2011 males were 4 times more likely to be judicially waived than females in person offense cases. I also believe that just as it should not matter what race you are it also should not matter your gender. I do however agree with the fact that there are problems within our court system. I personally believe that there are some woman out there that are far more dangerous than some of the men out there today. I do not necessarily agree with woman being less risk than a male. Sunshine123 & UofM123
Cases Waived- All states have a certain upper age of original jurisdiction for juvenile courts which vary from 15-17 depending on the state. States also have various laws that allow younger juveniles of the upper age to be tried as an adult. Concurrent jurisdiction laws allow prosecutors discretion on whether they file a case in juvenile or criminal court. Statutory exclusion laws grant criminal courts original jurisdiction over certain classes of cases involving juveniles. And Judicial waiver laws which authorize or require the juvenile judge to remove certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults in criminal court. Nearly all states (45) have discretionary judicial waiver provisions in which juvenile court judges have discretion to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles and refer their cases to criminal court. These laws authorize but do not require transfer in cases meeting threshold requirements for waiver. Some states (15) have presumptive waiver laws which designate a category of cases in which waiver to criminal court is presumed to be appropriate. Other state (15) provide for mandatory waiver in cases that meet certain age, offense or prior record criteria. In 2011 U.S. courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled more than 1.2 million cases. More than half were requesting to be wavered. From 1985 to 2011 the rate of waived cases has fluctuated a lot like a roller coaster. The number of judicially waived person offense case increased by 204% between 1985 and 1994 and then fell substantially through 2001. From 1989 to 1992 petitioned drug offense cases were more likely to be waived to criminal court than any other offense category. This also makes sense for the time because around this time America was in the war on drugs and was taking the drug offenses as number one and everything else second. During this era we were extremely hard on drugs and and drug users and dealers. Drugs were our number one priority especially cocaine because this was the rise of it in our nation. Also males were more likely to be waived then women were. The reason for this could have been because there was more males committing crimes or we just favored the women population this much over our male population. The reasoning behind this could be because there is a lot of discrepancy in the courts. If a female was waived to criminal court over a male more than people would complain that females are getting scrutinized and treated unfair in the courts. Also, I think another reason behind this is because judges look at a female and see them at less of a risk than a male. In 1985 there was 62% more white people that were being waived that there was of any other race (Black- 36%, Other- 2%). This was very shocking to me because everyone says that the reason to our prisons having more black males than white is because of the war on drugs. Everyone thinks that black males are the trouble makers in our society and yes there may be more of them in our prison and jail systems but that doesn't mean that every black male is the same as those. Based on my personal experiences some black males I have came into contact with during my job is some of the nicest people I have met and dealt with. We shouldn't just assume and label every black male the same as ones that have been arrested. Everyone is different and has different lives so we can't think that two people are identical because no two people are, even twins they both act differently and have different experiences. NDIrish123, Fireboy123.
I disagree when you stated the reason for women not being waived to criminal court was because people would complain. It was simply because males were committing more of the violent crime then women were. Don't get me wrong women were committing crime just as much but they were committing more victim-less crimes the men. I do agree with you that there is a persona against black males that they are all the same as the ones in prison and that people stereotype black males more because their are more of them in prison. In my opinion that is just a lack of education among society that will never be fixed. Klick123 Blackhawk123
This article opens up with the importance of juvenile arrest data. It is essential to keep records of all juvenile arrests made in order to better the system. It is the best way to physically look at data and conclude what trends are being made. One thing that stood out to me was how juvenile arrests have been down in 2011 by 11% from 2010. This is clear indication that analyzing the data collected has help the system find ways to help juveniles. I agree that getting involved in the system and confinement can have damaging affects on a juvenile’s health. Emotionally and physically being kept in confinement is only going to do more harm than good in the long run. I believe that giving the youth much-needed treatment and services when entered into the system would benefit everyone. Because most of the information comes from the UCR program there are limitations. When crimes are reported to the UCR only the most serious crime in the offense is collected. This means that we are not getting the full amount of offenses committed. I believe it is important to know what the criminal committed and not just their most serious offense. While looking at the number of arrest in 2011 on page 3 some interesting results stood out to me. In 2011 the total estimated number of juvenile arrest was 1,470,000. Out of the 1,470,000 twenty-seven percent were younger than 15 and sixty-six percent were white. Out of the most serious offenses the property crime index had the most overall the other categories. It is great to see that juvenile arrest for violent crimes fell 29%, however, other offenses did rise because of this. Most of the serious offenses have been at an all time low since 2011. Such categories include rape, aggravated assault, and murder. However, since the overall assert rate for juveniles have decreased, these offenses for adults have increased. I don’t understand what could be the correlation with juvenile arrest vs adults, but looking at the chart on page 4 you can see how the do go hand and hand with each other. Gender wise I would assume that males would commit most of the juvenile crimes. This article stated that 429,000 arrest were females younger than 18 in 2011. One statistic that stood out to me was that in 2011 fifty-one percent of violent crimes involved black youth and forty-seven involved white youth. Both races were relatively close in numbers for violent crimes. In total for the most serious offense black represent 13% and whites 11%. Overall it is clear that juvenile arrest trends have declined in all categories over the years. I believe this is due to research and making corrections to the system in order to keep juveniles out of trouble and into the right hands to become a better citizen in our society. Keeping them locked up isn’t going to change them as a person and is only going to make matters worse. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I agree that keeping juveniles in confinement generally will do more harm than good in the long run. However, in some cases, I think that confinement is the only route that will be effective in straightening out certain juveniles. The dumb teenagers that make bonehead mistake once or twice do not need to be confined by any mean, but when we see a juvenile commit crime after crime, a little bit of time served will do a lot more good than bad as time progresses. There was a teenager that I grew up around that never stayed out of trouble for very often, and a little bit of time in confinement has seemed to straighten them right up, and there hasn't been any trouble since then, so I think in some cases it is absolutely beneficial. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
Reading this article was very disheartening. It is well know that there is child abuse everywhere. What is not known is the factual numbers unfortunately. There are even times where child abuse of some kind is happening and we don’t even know it. In this article it says that very little is known about the amount of children exposed to violence. This is thought to make or could make a major difference in the numbers because it fails to reveal the full extent of violence towards children. It also fails to account fully for multiple victimizations that many experience and in what category or certain type of violence. Having this information could help determine the extent of a crime they may commit or what crimes they may be vulnerable to. One part of this article that kind of caught my eye was the physical assault section. I say that it kind of caught my eye because it happens all the time but I was unaware of the numbers and when they decrease and when they continue to rise. Per this article almost half (about 46%) of the children that were surveyed were physically assaulted within the last year and more than half (about 56%) had been physically assaulted in their lifetime. I had always thought that the parents or guardians were doing majority of the abuse but according to this article and the surveys that were done, the physical abuse that was peaking during the middle childhood was assaults done by siblings. How anyone would be okay with physically assaulting their sibling blows my mind. Obviously they are being taught that this is okay. The assaults done by siblings decreased or showed a decline after the middle childhood age. Unfortunately the most severe assaults were on the rise steadily with age. In the age group of 14 to 17 is when the physical assaults with injury started coming into play more as well as new forms of violence. A section that this article touched on but was not very elaborate was reaching across disciplines. I completely agree with what little was said here. I think it would help in many ways if when there are calls for domestic abuse and an investigation is done the obvious victims should not be the only ones being looked at. The children if there are any should also be reached out to. There may not be any apparent abuse but if that child is constantly seeing the different abuses happening right in front of them, they may be at a higher risk to start doing the same abuses if not more severe to someone in the future. If the different agencies can work together it could help prevent or decrease the number of children becoming delinquent as they get older. Getting others in the children's life involved such as school teachers and child care providers could also play a big role as they could help identify if there may be an issue before anything happens based on the way these children interact with one another on different levels doing different types of activities. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I agree that we cannot be absolutely sure of the realistic numbers of child abuse that happen throughout the country. There is too much that goes unreported due to a list of reasons. Kids do not fully understand situations like this, and will most likely not report the abuse that they are going through as a child, or even a young adult. I also find it interesting that a pretty large chunk of the abuse comes from siblings. Of course I understand the reality of picking on each other, because I went through plenty of that, but actual abuse was never a real issue, so that statistic is definitely a bit surprising to me. gh_blackhawks123, KLICk123
I completely agree, its so many people in this world getting abused. Not knowing about these things is heart breaking in a way because you never know it could be happening every day and now as we speak. Not only are kids being abused but emotionally they are abused because they have lost someone that they were close to and they don’t have that person any more to look up to. Even internet plays a big part because the internet has so much power in so many ways. Kids get bullied left and right and never know what they are going through at home. It’s so easy to give your opinion or talk about someone in a computer or phone because you’re not in front of those people or person. It’s so sad what kids go through and no one really knows and I agree, some of these should go surveyed because it could still be going on. -babyblue123
After reading the article "Delinquency Cases Waived to Criminal Court, 2011" off of the OOJDP (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention) website, I came across some very interesting facts or numbers. The first thing that I found interesting was the types of transfer laws. It was interesting to me because I did not know about them. There are three basic types of transfer laws: concurrent jurisdiction law, statutory exclusion law, and judicial waiver law. A basic description of those laws are that concurrent jurisdiction law allow prosecutors discretion, statutory exclusion law grants criminal courts original jurisdiction, and judicial waiver law authorizes or requires juvenile court judges to remove youth from juvenile court and be tried as an adult. The even more interesting thing is the broad categories inside the judicial waiver. The three categories are discretionary, presumptive, and mandatory. The most common among the states, 45 states, is discretionary judicial waiver. The discretionary judicial waiver allows the juvenile court judges to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles and refer their cases to criminal court. I personally believe that if the juvenile court judges have discretion it could help some of these children. I think it could help in more than one way as if the judge has dealt with the same delinquent over and over again and can see that they do not want to change or get help that person does not deserve to keep getting more chances and risk a more severe action being done. On the other hand if a delinquent has never been in trouble or been in the system giving that person another chance should be given based upon the offense. Obviously murder and stealing something are two very different offenses. Something else that I found very interesting was the numbers that were recorded and the differences between 1985 and 2011. Between these years, 1985 and 2011, petitioned person offense cases was the most likely to be judicially waived than any other offenses. The fact that juveniles or children are committing more person and drug crimes than any other crime is flat out disgusting. Almost every child if not every child has committed some type of "crime". Anything from stealing a dollar from their parents, drinking alcohol under age, smoking under age, skipping school, ect. These are all considered crimes but they are not really hurting anyone just curious things that kids do. When it comes to committing crimes towards other individuals to inflict harm on them or doing drugs those are things that kids are not just "curious" about in my opinion. I believe that these kinds of crimes are done because there is something else going on. Whether it be their living conditions or they are looking up to someone else that is doing these crimes, these children are somewhere somehow seeing or being told that it is okay when it is far from that. When these children are influenced so young it is harder for the law or law enforcement to in a way scare them straight. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I completely agree with you when you said that the judges should have a little discretion. If a juvenile is always being put into the juvenile court system and the judge sees that, I believe that they should get a little harsher punishment. Also, when you said that the one kid that comes into the court system for something for their first time, they should get a little punishment involved with it just for them to realize that whatever they are committing is not worth it. So, this way hopefully they will think twice before ever committing some sort of crime again. I agree when you say that all kids have committed some sort of crime which is smoking underage, drinking, taking a few dollars from their parents. That is something every child will do sometime. But why do you think people think it is ok for their children to go out and steal and commit delinquent acts? Trojan65, Cavs123
Demographics- There are three states that are far above every other state and those are Wyoming, Nebraska, South Dakota, and West Virginia. These states female residential placement rates by race/ethnicity (per 100,000 female juveniles) 2015. are anywhere between 122 to <= 197. This really surprises me because when we think of Nebraska, Wyoming and South Dakota we think of no one living out there and it being a very quite and lonesome state especially Wyoming. The states populations are Wyoming- 585,501, South Dakota- 865,454, Nebraska- 1.907 million, West Virginia- 1.831 million. Also when we think of these states we don't think of anything being there for example Wyoming and Nebraska all we think about is cornfields and nothingness and in South Dakota we think of a hilly empty land that is sparsely inhabited. Now in Illinois we have Chicago and Springfield as some examples of what people think about when they think of our state well also us being broke also. In these states this is a very high rate of female residential placement I think knowing that these states don't have a huge population. For every 100,000 non-Hispanic black female juveniles in the population, 110 were in residential placement on October 28, 2015; for Hispanic females the rate was 44, and for non-Hispanic white females it was 32. The residential placement rate is the number of female juveniles in residential placement per 100,000 female juveniles age 10 through the upper age of original juvenile jurisdiction in each state. Nationally the ratio of the residential placement rate for minority females to that for white females was two to one. In 30 states and the District of Columbia the placement rate for non-Hispanic black females exceeded the rate for all other race/ethnicity groups. Nationally, the placement rates for females were substantially lower than the corresponding rates for males. For example the overall placement rate for females was 47 per 100,000 female juveniles in the population. In comparison the placement rate for males was 253 per 100,000 male juveniles. This surprises me with the female rate. Overall I thought the male rate would have been higher by a big margin because we think all males commit crimes and females are always the victims but we are wrong. That's not meant to be mean but females should be held just as liable as males and treated the same way to have fairness and equality across the board. Just because someone is just a different sex doesn't mean we should treat them differently. Also they are the majority to. Of the 2010 Census population, 157.0 million were female (50.8 percent) while 151.8 million were male (49.2 percent). Between 2000 and 2010, the male population grew at a slightly faster rate (9.9 percent) than the female population (9.5 percent). Other than these four states nationwide it is pretty equal the rates are. There is no other states I see that have such a variation like the four states I have listed in this comment. NDIrish123, Fireboy123.
Arrest I find this article to be very interesting because it says, “Although Juvenile arrest rates for many crimes are at their lowest levels in more than 30 years, many states and communities are instituting legislative, policy, and practice changes to reduce juvenile arrest even further”. Meaning they are still trying to do everything they can do to make sure it stays like that. Which is a good idea, so everyone can be safe and wont over crowd the place with juveniles. Also, In the article they say they are trying to make sure when the youth enter the system, he or she receives much-needed treatment and services. I agree with this statement because in the past they have been charging these juveniles as adults when it should be nowhere near what they charge adults because are still young minded. It would undoubtedly provide positive and healthy outcomes for youth, families, and communities. Another thing that was interesting was the Arrest Statistics. Arrest statistics are most appropriately a measure of entry into the justice system. They use this system if the juveniles have any charges in their name at once and they take the most bad one and arrest them. I feel like that it’s a good system because some charges are meant to be let alone. -babyblue123
Victims I found this article to be an eye opener because without these surveys you would never know what kids or teenagers go through. The fact they are expose to violence every day in their homes or schools anywhere is very interesting. In the article, it says that our society children are exposed to violence in their daily lives. It says that 60 percent of the children surveyed were exposed to violence within the past year, either directly or indirectly. Meaning they would be getting abused at home by family member. Boyfriend or anyone they know. Also, indirectly by someone sending the, threats or saying things about them, such as bullying them every day at school. Social media plays a big part because teens can say anything they want other a phone or computer and not feel bad or thing about anyone feelings. Another interesting thing in the article it says “Even if they are not physically present, children may be affected by intentional harm done by a murder or assault on a family member or a close neighbor. It can mentally harm someone when they have lost someone they are close to because they cared about them so much. It’s so many ways people can be exposed to violence and it’s sad. -babyblue123
Wavier I found a lot found a lot of interesting things in this article. I learned that a Judicial waiver occurs when a juvenile court judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult court in order to deny the juvenile the protections that juvenile jurisdictions provide. The youngest offender who can be waived to adult is a 17or 18- year-old. But, in some states the age is as low as 13 or 14. In the article it says the at male person offense cases were far more likely to be judicially waived than cases than cases in any other offense category. Meaning not only did they have the official power to make legal decisions and judgements but they could have a juvenile be tried as adults in criminal court. Which person offense can be a robbery, rape, assault, or a homicide. And as for female drug offense cases were most likely to be waived. -babyblue123
Females Women are more likely than men to be in prison for fraud and robbery, while men are more apt to have committed violent crimes. Also, men were more likely to have been locked up for murder, rape or sexual assault. Almost 13 percent of men were jailed on murder charges and 13 percent for rape or sexual assault, while 11 percent of female inmates were there on murder charges and 2 percent for rape or sexual assault. Even though male commits most of the crimes females still have a little bit to do with these crime rates. Women are also being imprisoned at a faster rate than men these days. The number of women prisoners sentenced to more than a year in state or federal facilities grew by almost 3 percent between 2012 and 2013, while the increase in male inmates was 0.2 percent. While nearly two-thirds of women under probation supervision are white, nearly two-thirds of those confined in local jails and State and Federal prisons are minority & black, Hispanic and other races. Hispanics account for about 1 in 7 women in State prisons but nearly 1 in 3 female prisoners in Federal custody. -babyblue123
Part 1 The OJJDP provides an accurate and very informative data report regarding juvenile arrests and statistical data on what types of offenses caused those arrests. However, since the OJJDP utilizes the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s UCR program to provide its data, we can only see data on certain offenses in relations to arrests only if the offense being shown was the most serious offense during that arrests. Once again we can see potential problems with the limited UCR program in that we can’t quite paint a whole picture when it comes to crimes being committed and reported simply by using the UCR. Nonetheless, I found many interesting data points during my reading. One of the most alarming data analysis points was the correlation that between 2002 and 2011 the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles, but increased for adults. This correlation seems to have some sort of social causations. It could be possible that many of these juveniles are aging into adult offenders. Since the report is categorizing juveniles as younger than 18 it is possible than through 2002 to 2011 juveniles are crossing the threshold of 18 years of age and are still offending. This has to be in relation to the 20/80 rule we learned about in class as well. Perhaps there is fluctuations appearing over the span of the last decade. Furthermore, I found that female arrests have been decreasing at a slower pace than male arrests in several offense categories. This is reflective in both adults and juveniles regarding gender arrest ratios. Some examples of offense categories in which females are decreasing less than males are aggravated and simple assault, larceny theft, liquor law violations, and even disorderly conduct. This is interesting due to our tendency to link most crimes to mostly males. It is unclear to me as to why female arrest rates aren't dropping quicker than males but it could be somewhat due to the increase of female recognition and importance in the social aspects of society as we make progress in equality. It will be interesting to revisit these statistics in the future years to see new patterns unfold and how they relate to older ones. Ghost123, Gymlife123
Part 2 The juvenile arrest data provided by this article show that there are reasons for encouragement. In 2011, the overall arrest rates of juveniles had declined 11 percent from the previous year and down even further at 31 percent since the year 2002. In 2011, there were an estimated 190,900 juveniles arrested on the charge of simple assault. Of these juveniles, about one-third were represented by females and about 39% involved youths under the age of 15 and nearly 60% involved white youths. Juveniles under the age of 15 accounted for about 57% of all juvenile arrests for arson in 2011 and 40% of juvenile arrests for simple assault, vandalism, and disorderly conduct. Females only accounted for less than 10% of the juvenile arrest rates for murder, but accounted for nearly 25% of aggravated assault arrests. After a decade of declines between the years 1994 and 2004, the juvenile arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses increased the following two years and then began to decline each year through 2011. With the exception of aggravated assault, juvenile arrests for violent crimes hit historic lows in 2011. After a 33% decline since 2008, the number of juvenile robbery arrests in 2011 was at its lowest level since 1980. The arrest rates for rape also fell 33% since 2004. Between 2002 and 2011, the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles but increased for adults in several offense categories. The Property Crime Index arrest rates for juveniles were cut in half between 1994 and 2006. By the year 2011, the number of Property Crime Index arrests dropped 23%. Between 2008 and 2011, juvenile arrests went down for individual property offenses such as burglary at 26%, larceny-theft at 21%, and motor vehicle theft at 44% and arson at 24%. 429,000 females under the age of 18 were arrested in 2011. From 2002 to 2011, the arrests of females decreased less than that of their male counterparts in several categories of offenses. For instance, between 2002 and 2011, adult male arrests for aggravated assault dropped 16%, while the rate for females only dropped about 1%. Ghost123, Gymlife123
Victim, We know that exposure to violence can have many negative affects on a person's life. This is especially true when people are exposed to violence at a young age. The OJJDP have utilized surveys to collect data on such exposures and have tried to isolate patterns and causes of such violences. The NatSCEV, or National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence, aims to provide a more complete and accurate picture of children and the types of violence they are exposed to throughout their lifetime. Some of the types of violence surveyed include, internet harassment, assault, and bullying. The victimization these children experience when in contact with violence repeatedly over the course of their lives can have dramatic consequences. Victimized children can sometimes turn to crime as they get older and have trouble forming bonds with others. There is also the risk that these children will have problems finding a partner and have issues with their parenting abilities as well. Chronic violence within a child's life could cause him or her to transfer their victimization to their children causing a new generation of victimized children. In 2008 alone at least 46.3 percent of surveyed children were assaulted. Reports of lifetime exposure to violence were generally about 33 to 50 percent higher in 2009 than compared to 2008. This is an alarming report that could indicate that even now in 2017 the violence among children continues to grow. This growth could be escalated with children's growing connection with media outlets like never before. We will need to continue tracking violence within the households and provide support and relief for children and their families who are victims of some form of violence. Part 1, Ghost123, Gymlife123
Victims Part 2 The National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence, or NatSCEV, is the most comprehensive national survey of the incidence and prevalence of children’s exposure to violence to this date. In this survey which was conducted between January and May of 2008, children were surveyed about their experiences with violence both within the past year and in their lifetimes throughout several major categories of violence such as conventional crime, child maltreatment, victimization by peers and siblings, sexual victimization, witnessing and indirect violence, school threats and violence, and internet victimization. The NatSCEV found that most of our society’s children are indeed exposed to violence in their everyday lives. Over 60 percent of the children who participated in this survey reported that they were exposed to some type of violence within the past year. About half of those participants, 46.3%, said they were assaulted at least once in the past year and over 10% were injured from said assault. Another 25% were either victims of robbery, vandalism, or theft and about 1 in 10 were found to have suffered from child maltreatment which includes both physical and mental abuse, neglect and a family abduction. This survey also discovered that just about seven in eight children that reported having been exposed to violence with the past year also reported that they were experiencing throughout their entire lifetimes. This means that these children are a continuing risk to violent victimization. Unfortunately, children are much more likely than adults to be exposed to violence and crime. In a 2005 survey, children ages 12-19 were found to be more than twice as likely to be victims of violent crimes as that of the entire population as a whole. The results from being exposed to violence can be detrimental to these children. The results have shown that children who are exposed to violence undergo lasting physical, mental, and emotional harm also suffering from difficulties with attachment, regressive behavior, anxiety and depression, and aggression and conduct problems. Even more disheartening is the fact that being exposed to violence could in fact impair a child’s capacity for partnering and parenting later in life, essentially just continuing the cycle of violence into the next generation. Gymlife123, Ghost123
Waiver, While reading the article pertaining to delinquency cases waived to criminal court I was surprised to find a few striking bits of information. First off, in 2011, the U.S. courts with juvenile jurisdiction dealt with more than 1.2 million delinquency cases. Of these 1.2 million cases, 54% were handled formally through the use of petitions or waiver hearings pushed by the prosecution. Of all the petitioned caseloads only about 1% resulted in a judicial waiver with a peak in 1994 at 13,600 cases. However, in 2011 juvenile courts waived only 5,400 cases. This drop in waived delinquency caseloads is very noticeable and, by appearance, seems positive. While the drop-in caseloads are partially due to the decline in juvenile violent crime and other lower offense rates, the main reason that struck me as an issue comes from bypass process becoming more and more popular. With the expansion of nonjudicial transfer laws, the judicial system will allow the prosecution to take a case straight to criminal court in effect bypassing juvenile courts altogether. This process gives the prosecution the power to change and affect juveniles lives more harshly if a fair and just process is not provided. As this bypassing process was becoming more popular so was the war on drugs. During the late 1980’s and early 1990’s the U.S. saw a huge spike in drug cases being petitioned to criminal court. This resulted in the incarceration of more juveniles under stricter criminal court punishments. This wave of drug cases is largely due to the unpopular opinions of the public regarding drugs at the time of this spike. Thankfully we have seen a decrease in the amount of drug offense cases being transferred to criminal court over the years. The OJJDP really helps paint a picture of the patterns we have faced as a nation regarding offense types and hopefully as time passes on we will continue to see progress with our juvenile court waiver processes. As prosecutors gain more and more of the advantage against juveniles it is yet to be seen whether or not our juveniles will truly have a fair and just judicial system in the future. Part 1 Ghost123, Gymlife123
I agree with you that we will see a decrease in the amount of drug cases being transferred to criminal court. I made this point in my blog that it isn't fair to have a drug offense on your permanent record as a juvenile. You have your whole life ahead of you, and i'm glad they're finally focusing more on persons crimes and property crimes rather than the drug crimes. I also agree with you that prosecutors should be more understanding towards the juvenile that has committed a crime. They should have reduced power in the judiciary system. -Arthur123 DC123
I agree with you that we will see a decrease in the amount of drug cases being transferred to criminal court. I made this point in my blog that it isn't fair to have a drug offense on your permanent record as a juvenile. You have your whole life ahead of you, and i'm glad they're finally focusing more on persons crimes and property crimes rather than the drug crimes. I also agree with you that prosecutors should be more understanding towards the juvenile that has committed a crime. They should have reduced power in the judiciary system.-babyblue123
I agree, it’s not fair what they charge juveniles. Like a drug case, why would you want a drug case to be on their records for their whole life. They have their whole life ahead of them and maybe could fix themselves if you help them get on the right track and give them a chance. I feel like shouldn’t always focus on drugs because there are worst things happening out there than just selling drugs -and drug use.-babyblue123
Waivers Part 2 From 1989 to 1992, petitioned drug offense cases were more likely to be waived to criminal court than that of any other offense category. In 1991, the proportion of drug offense cases that were judicially waived peaked at about 3.6% with a total of 1,500 cases and then declined to under 1% in 2011. In 2011, 1.4% of formally handled person offense cases were waived compared with 0.9% of drug offense cases, 0.7% of property offense cases, and 0.3% of public order offense cases. Person offense cases accounted for a bigger proportion of the waived caseload that property offense cases beginning in 1993. What was also interesting was that although the proportions of waived cases involving females and younger juveniles increased a little bit between 1985 and 2011, the vast majority of waived cases involved males over the age of sixteen. However, between those same years, the proportion of waived cases involving males went down from 95% to 92%. Also so did the proportion of waived cases involving juveniles over the age of sixteen, dropping from 94% to 92%. During the 1980’s and 1990’s, transfer laws proliferated and expanded dramatically. Nearly every state legislature revised or rewrote their laws to broaden the lens of transfer; lower age and/or offense thresholds, move away from individual and toward categorical handling, and shifting authority from judges to prosecutors. Gymlife123, Ghost123
Violence In the article that speaks about children becoming exposed to violence, but it only is a survey that took five months to complete. This is weird because most surveys or counts look at data collected over a year period. The study seems to be a pretty good baseline for exposure to violence because it wants to discover the violence at home, school and in their communities. I am surprised that this is the first ever survey to attempt to compile data on where children are exposed to violence. You would think something similar to this would have been done well before 2008. It is not surprising that the majority of children are exposed to violence; I think this is quite the understatement as I would be confident to say that one hundred percent of children have been exposed to violence at some point in their lives. Of course when the study looked at overall violence in the kids’ entire lives there was a large increase in the number of violence exposures. What is crazy is that children are more likely than adults to be exposed to violence; this is not good for the child’s development. Looking at the broad picture this isn’t a good sign for kids, but look at me I was exposed to violence my entire childhood and I turned out all alright. So there are some children that will be more affected by violence than others, this all depends on the violent situation and the child’s mind. I am glad that it states that most of the time children are not extremely affected by the violence they are exposed to, they are rather resilient to it. The study found that the earlier a child was able to receive help according to the violence they witnessed then they had a lot less likelihood of having issues stemming from the event. The violence that the study covers is pretty much any violence that just about anyone could ever be exposed to. So it covers all the bases needed to paint an accurate picture. As usual the study is not able to paint an entire picture because it fails to cover every single juvenile in the entire country. It is still able to provide adequate information on what the entire population of juveniles has likely been exposed to. Previous studies that have attempted to cover violence like this study did not succeed in providing much quality info because they focused on very specific types of violence. What is shocking is that one of these studies actually asked the children and caregivers about violence exposure. Is this a joke? Why would the caregiver be truthful if they committed or exposed the child to violence? Also how would they be an accurate representation of all the violence the child has been exposed to? It’s not like they are with the child twenty four seven for seventeen years and 364 days! Therefore it is great that a new study came out in 2008 that was actually accurate and provided beneficial info. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
I too found it strange that the survey only took 5 months to complete. It makes me question how valuable the information must be if it was gathered in a hurry. The way I think about it is, not all the answers to the test will be correct if it was rushed through and not everything in the questions was ready carefully enough. I agree with you when you stated that the study wasn't able to paint the entire required picture because it doesn't cover all the ground. Meaning, that not all of the juveniles in America were not accounted for in this survey. It really is a good thing that they updated the information by putting out and completely a new survey to possibly replace this current one. It’s true that they wouldn’t know the exact details of something like the amount of violence that a child is exposed to because not every child is monitored constantly to be able to see all the violence that they have to witness for themselves. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
Arrests The article about juvenile arrests in 2011; claims that it captures the performance of the juvenile justice system, which I find to be false. How can arrest records tell us how well the juvenile justice system is performing? They do nothing to say that we are doing a better job at arresting juveniles or not. It also claims that it can tell how well our government is doing at the prevention of delinquency. How does the OJJDP know that less delinquency is occurring when quite frankly those specific juveniles may just be getting away with their crimes now more so than ever before? Sure the arrests in 2011 were down eleven percent from the previous year, but that doesn’t mean our government was more effective at preventing delinquency. It is good to hear that many governments are trying to reduce the number of arrest able offenses for juveniles to avoid sending them into the system in the first place. This gives them a better chance at learning from their mistakes and never entering the system later on in life. Of course the arrest statistics are not the most accurate pieces of information out there, but they can be if you understand the way juveniles are likely to commit crimes, i.e. in groups. So you could get somewhat skewed info if you failed to realize that one specific crime was committed by many individual juveniles. Such as when Dr. White did his sting operation, had he pressed charges on the juveniles a huge jump in the arrest of one specific crime (multiple different ones though) would have occurred. A surprising fact is that one and a half million juveniles were arrested in 2011. This is not an acceptable number as there are some crimes that should not result in arrest such as the one thousand arrests from gambling alone. Really? Gambling is not a crime that should be arrest able for a freaking child! Prostitution should not get a child arrested! It should get them the help they desperately need for goodness sakes! We need to focus on the complete BS that kids are being arrested for and fix it, instead of providing reports on it. Sure it’s good that juvenile arrests for violent crimes are decreasing, but the real question is if juveniles are just getting away with them more so than before? Look at Chicago, they only go up in the murder rate every year, I bet they have plenty of kids pulling the trigger and not getting arrested for it! This is foolishness and is not an accurate representation of what really is going on behind the closed doors. Another thing that trips me up is that there is a disclaimer under all the arrest counts saying that arrest records were not available for Hawaii. This is not acceptable as that means the entire arrest record counting for the United States was not quite ‘entire’. Therefore I just found an error that makes this entire study invalid in the study of statistics! How can these fools say the arrest count for juveniles is decreasing in the U.S. when they don’t even utilize every single state? Yes Hawaii is a state! I don’t need to say anything else to make my point proven. The counts provided are flawed….. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
According to the article juvenile arrests for violent crime declined for the fifth consecutive year, as of 2011. The FBI assessed the trends in violent crimes by looking at four major offenses. Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape , robbery and aggravated assault. One thing I noticed was that between the years 1994 and 2004 it was a juvenile crime decline, but the crime increased between years 2004-2006. As a result, the number of juvenile violent crime arrests in 2011 was less than any of the previous 32 years and 15% less than the previous low point in 1984. Also another thing I read was that 1 and 5 juvenile violent crime arrests involved females and more than half involved minority youth. Females contributed to 29% of juvenile arrests in 2011. Law enforcement made 429,000 arrests of females younger than age 18 in 2011. Between 2002 and 2011, females were mostly getting arrested for motor vehicle theft according to the violent crime index. Females with 72% and males with 69%. The second highest crime females got arrested for was DUI. 39% females and 57% males. These are all females and males that are about 15 to maybe about 24. To the minority side of things, it says that the U.S. juvenile population composed of juvenile between aged 10-17 in 2011 was 76% white, 17% black Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2% American Indian. More than half of all juveniles arrests for violent crimes in 2011 involved black youth and 47% involved white youth. For property crime arrests, the proportion was 62% white and 35% black. According to the article Black youth were overrepresented in juvenile arrests. The black proportion of juvenile arrest in 2011 chart, says that most black youth were arrested for robbery (68%) and murder (54%). In another chart it states how some juveniles were involved in about 1 in 13 arrests for murder and about 1 in 5 arrests for robbery burglary and larceny-theft. One thing that really surprised me was that everybody committed Arson. Arson , was the leading category under the property crime index (42%). That's just really shocking to me. It says males commit about 43% ,female 34% and black and white youth both at 42%. It is just really to me how in 2011 the highest juvenile arrests percentage was for Arson. I just wouldn't think it would be that much arson going on between all groups of juveniles. 42% is a big number compared to all the other crimes on the index. DC123 Arthur123
I too was surprised about the rates of arson in the statistics. I always knew that children had a fascination with fire, it's just a scary thine to think about that so many children were trying to set the world on fire. It did make me wonder about how many of those cases were just children playing fire and accidentally starting an uncontrollable fire, because I personally know some young pyros that would most certainly be in jail right now had there not been an adult present to control and maintain the fires they were starting. Though it can also be very purposeful. I had a cousin try to blow up the house when he was 9 by swinging an axe at a gas line then trying to use a lighter to light it up. Had he been able to actually use the lighter he had taken from his dads desk, he might have succeeded in lighting the house on fire. Do I know why he did it? Not a real clue. He claimed it was because the basement was too dark and he needed light to see. I couldn't understand his logic but it's made me think about these statistics because some of those arrests could have been accidental and some of them could have been on purpose, or some of them could have even been intentional but confused and done because they didn't know what they were doing was dangerous. Anyway, its hard to tell, but an interesting statistic to think about. SomethingProfound123, illini123, ws123
After reading the Delinquency Cases Waived article, I found out that each state has their own way to handle juvenile cases in the judiciary system. As far as transfer laws go, I think that the concurrent transfer law is the most effective because the other two basically say that if the case is bad enough, you automatically go to criminal court, or in other words to be tried as an adult. Some states allow you to be tried as an adult at age 15! Depending on the crime committed that is scary stuff to think about. Now as far as judicial waivers go, I have to say that I believe in discretionary judicial waivers for good reason. Like I said before, juvenile delinquents should only be tried as adults depending on the crime committed. Let's take smoking marijuana as a juvenile for example. Like we talked about in class, it is definitely a crime under the law to possess or be under the influence of marijuana, but are the kids really a dangerous criminal who is a danger to society? Probably not. This kind of crime should not be taken out of juvenile court into criminal court, whereas a crime like vandalism, theft, rape, or murder should be treated as if the juvenile was an adult. A small crime isn't worth ruining a teenagers chance of having an opportunity at getting a job later in life. It seems like they're not doing a bad job of keeping juveniles out of the criminal court either because the article says for every one thousand cases only four were waived to criminal court. Especially now a days because according to the graph in the article, drug waivers went down and property and persons crimes went up (this is a good thing in my opinion). The thing that was the most irritating about the article was the graph on the back that showed the waivers of certain ethnicity groups. For a majority of the crimes committed (Drugs, Person, Property, Public Order) the most cases that were waived into criminal court were black people. Like we talked about in class, the majority of people committing crime in the United States are white people, but somehow the black people are the ones getting caught more, and the ones who are being convicted more. Is it because the majority of black people are caught more, or is it part of a race bias in the judiciary system? Even though the number of crimes decreased in the past 20 years, it's sad to see the profiling occurring in these instances. Also crime committed according to your sex? It makes sense that males commit more crimes than females, but the gap in the articles graph shows a HUGE difference between opposite sexes. I believe it is because males are outside more, and are also targeted over females. Really it's nature to think that females are more innocent than males, but I believe there needs to be tougher enforcement against women who are always seen as the victim in law enforcement, or in the judicial system. Arthur123 DC123
I agree that it is scary to imagine being tried as an adult at the age of 15. Even though the committed a horrible crime, this just shows that that child needs to be placed in treatment and not go to criminal court. With your point about juveniles smoking marijuana I do believe it isn’t a huge danger to society and that it shouldn’t be taken to court, I do believe something should be done about it so the juvenile does not go down the wrong path. Small crimes shouldn’t ruin their lives either because everyone makes mistakes in their life, especially as a young teen. I believe that most of the time where you’re doing these small crimes makes a huge difference. Like you said in class most of the time a white child is most likely in an area where cops are not most present. Overall, it’s important to take into consideration all the circumstances in a juvenile’s life before making big decisions. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I completely agree that juveniles should only be committed based on the level of crime they committed. Sometimes, the punishment is completely unfair to the child because they could intentionally trial them as an adult for the crime committed but had they trailed them as a juvenile the punishment might not have been as severe. I mean, even rehabilitation could possibly work if it was at such an early age, even if it was as severe of a crime as murder or rape. However, crimes like marijuana possession or petty theft could easily be rehabilitated instead of institutionalized. It could affect their life drastically in the long run. Once a juvenile has a record and is labeled a criminal, it makes everything for their future so much harder, especially when trying to get a job. If anything, this information could really be used to put a stop to more people in the future from committing the same crimes. SomethinProfound123, ws123, illini123
It was shocking to see that even so long ago in 2011, the rate for arresting kids was so high. The number recorded, 1.5 million kids, which is considered persons under the age of 18, were arrested. However, when it stated that the number recorded in 2011 was less than what was recorded in 2002, I was relieved but shocked at the same time. 1.5 million is a crazy number to begin with. I can’t imagine how bad it must have been in 2002 if it was more than 2011. This means that we can have hope for our younger generations and hopefully they can keep the trend going in this direction until we have the arrest rates down close to zero. When looking at the chart on page three I noticed that one of the highest percentage decrease since 2002 was that motor vehicle theft was down by sixty nine percent. Seeing that makes me think that kids are starting to learn from either other people who may have been arrested for these crimes or they may just not want to do these types of crimes anymore. One stat that did stick out to me was that from 2010 to 2011 the percent change for arson had gone up by eight percent. Even though it is still a category that has an overall low arrest rate we still need to learn from this and figure out how to decrease this stat. I feel since the arrest rates are down maybe more kids are going to not fear cops anymore and find out that cops are the good guys. It’s just a shame to know that many children were getting arrested. I couldn’t believe the fact that the category larceny theft had the largest number of arrests compared to all the others, aside from the category labeled ‘other’. The categories were just outrageous. The fact that there were categories for things like drug abuse, sex offense, rape and murder just blew my mind. I didn’t think children were capable of such things. You would think that those would be things adults would commit. I’m sure this same format goes for recording adult criminal behavior as well but it doesn’t make this any less shocking. I did find it strange they had one columns of percentages specifically for white people. Why don’t they include percentages for all the races on here? I understand they have other reports for the races but it just seems strange to me. I find it good that all the rates have begun to decrease over time from times like 2002. I feel this report is good for showing some detail into the rates of arrests and the things that they are arrested for but it could use some more information or detail, maybe add in more than just a white percentage. That was just the first graph though. This report goes on to talk about the violent crime decrease and it showed line graphs of violent crime. Apparently, in 2011, it was at its lowest in history. It’s been 6 years since this report was made. I wonder what they are like today, whether they have gone up or down. The arrest rate in 2011 for weapons is so high. I think that is so crazy because even though they predicted that the young would commit more crimes than adults, it still just amazes me. 28,200 arrests in 2011 that is a considerable number. Other offenses in 2011 were charged, but were charged for a lesser offense. How though? There were 1.5 million arrests in 2011 for people that were under the age of 18. That just mean the kids that were getting arrested were clearly not in school and had a lot of free time. They were not being watched by their parents. Juvenile arrest for violent crimes fell 29% in the past 5 years. How did they fell? What was being done to get the numbers down. The report for this is recent because it is back in 2011, and it's only 2017. Within that few time frame youths have been doing good. They have been at least staying out of the police eye, and staying out of trouble. SomethingProfound123, illini123, ws123
Women- I think that it’s important to understand that women are just as bad as men, sometimes even worse. They can commit crimes just as much as the next person and these statistics from 2015 really show this. Well that and it also shows how the state they are in can affect the rate or crimes that are committed. While looking at the graphs and seeing that in 2015 there were over forty-eight thousand juveniles in prison is good because if we look at the late nineties we can see that the number is starting to decrease which is what we want a country. When looking at the percent of females and seeing that females make up fifteen percent, I would assume that over half of them in placement facilities are actual victims as we discussed the victim/offender. Seeing the graph for placements by race what most of us believe to be true is because more blacks are in placement facilities than any other race just like blacks make up a higher percentage of prisoners today they make up the highest percentage of juveniles too. Also for females who are in these placement facilities it is the exact same as males the higher percentage of race is blacks and the lowest percentage is whites. I know that reading from other articles that the percent difference is starting to close in and we are starting to see less of a gap between whites and other races. Why were the Hispanic and minority women the highest? Are they saying that those 2 types of people are the worse than any other? Because, if so that is kind of terrible to do. I would imagine that all ethnics would be on the same level. Just because one group is a tone darker or a tone lighter doesn’t mean that they are any better than the next one. White females in my eyes commit just as much crime as a black female. I would have imagined that Latina women would keep a low profile, but to see that their number was high kind of shocked me. Not saying that they should be put on a pedestal or anything but it is messed up that their number is relatively high. But, for them to be just women the men number is much higher than the women. That doesn’t surprise me at all. The men are 253 per 100,00 verse women is only 47 per 100,000. That’s expected though because though women have the capability to commit crimes, men still tower over them in the rates because it’s almost as if they are more driven to commit crime than women are, especially at such young ages where they are influenced by their parents or society. Maybe their friend’s parents are criminals or their own parents are criminals and that has a major influence over their decisions. Thankfully, though, it looks like the Illinois female juvenile rate isn’t nearly as high as some places like South Dakota, Wyoming or Nebraska. That’s a bit more of a relief. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123.
Waiver- After reading this article and seeing that some juveniles may be waived to criminal court is odd. I know only one percent of juvenile cases get waived, and some of those cases may need to be waived, but if we do not treat them or send them to maybe a rehab center at an early age then they will never learn from their mistakes. If we just send them to criminal court and they get locked up for twenty years then what are they going to do when they get out of prison. Seeing that the peak for juveniles getting waived to criminal court was in the 90’s probably mainly resulted from our government trying to crack down on drugs, so anyone who was caught with drugs should have to pay the penalty no matter what age. I can see waiving juveniles to criminal court if they murdered or raped someone, but if we send them to criminal court for drug offenses, then most of the time if they get convicted and sentenced they will not have the resources to get any help or to get a good education. With the waiver, I feel like it was good that is there to help the youth. It allows the youth to get another chance if the crime that they did was not really that bad. I do feel like sometimes it shouldn’t be allowed because at the end of the day the youth know what they are doing if they commit a crime. It's a choice that they make. I think it is very much hard to get a waiver passed on the youth. I was really shocked about how for every 1,000 cases only 4 of the cases get waived. That isn’t even half for such a substantial number. It is also good that the numbers decrease over the years. Why is it that the drug offenses peaked the highest? That was weird. Drug offenses are the number one that are being waived the most, in 2008. I found it odd that in 1994, when the rates skyrocketed, it wasn’t necessarily for white youth, but for African American youth instead. The statistics stated that the judicial waiver for drug offense cases involving black youth was three times the likelihood of white youth. However, in 2011, person, drug and public order offense cases were slightly more likely to be judicially waived than those involving white youth, which seems a lot like 1994. I wonder, though, what it would look like if one were to combine the statistics of the genders waived and the races waived. What would become of an African American man in a drug offense in comparison to a white man on the same offense or even a white or black female even. I think a very important aspect of the statistics is the attention to the rates of genders in comparison to each other as well as the races. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
Looking at the female residential placement demographics I was pretty surprised by the frequencies in each of the states. In total, accounting for all races/ethnicities it is represented that Wyoming, South Dakota, and Nebraska had the most females in the U.S. This was surprising to me because these are not very talked about states. I would think states such as California or possibly Texas would have greater numbers. Areas in which crimes are more prevalent because that would mean that treatment would be necessary in order to fix the issue. However, looking at the total numbers, California and Texas were on the lower side of numbers compared to those main three I mentioned earlier. Comparing Wyoming and California, Wyoming with 197 (per 100,000 female juveniles) and California being 59. Residential placement should be something given to every juvenile that has been convicted or has committed a crime. I believe this to be true because treatment is what juveniles need in order to become a better person and strive from their mistakes. By looking at the different race/ethnicities given on the website I was fascinated with the results I saw. The blue colors represented a much higher number than the color green. When I clicked on the demographics for White, I noticed a lot of the states were blue. On the other hand, when I clicked on the demographics for Black I found a lot greener states overall. The demographic that had the least amount of females in residential placement was Asian. Reading the text below the map stated the more males were placed in residential than females. This statement surprised me, but I do understand that there are more males committing more serious offenses. From an article provided on the ojjdp website, residential placement was more for juveniles who have committed more serious crimes. I noticed that I could look at the different years of the female placement statistics. In 2013 there were a lot more females in total being placed in residential than in the most current year listed being 2015. I found these numbers interesting because I would think that over more time, it would be more prevalent to keep juveniles in residential placement. Even though it is for hold juveniles awaiting the system, I believe that juveniles would benefit them greatly in the long run. Being brought into a place to get behavioral, emotional, and just overall treatment could help get these juveniles back on the right track. Looking at the text only version it was easier to see how different the numbers were across the U.S. For the U.S. total white was third in the overall total with minority and black being at the top. This makes me curious to compare the numbers for male residential placement with race/ethnicity in order to make more comparisons between them. I found this information to be extremely informative and interesting to see how different each state demographics play out. Sunshine123 & UofM123
Victims- Reading that more than sixty percent of children had been exposed to some sort of violence within the last year is terrible. What are we teaching our children or what are they going to learn from us is we cannot protect them from seeing this type of stuff and trying to emulate it. Now I know that we cannot stop everything that our kids may see, but we do need to start limiting some of the things that they may see. I feel that most of the violence that children may see if most likely on television or if they live in poverty stricken areas, there may be gangs around and they may not be able to get away from seeing all that stuff. When reading that almost half of the children who were surveyed had said they have been assault within a year is ridiculous. How are parents supposed to feel okay with letting their child go to the park or to a friend’s how by themselves if they may get attacked? How could kids know that their parents are looking out for them and trying to protect them if they are not around and the child gets assaulted? Children are being assaulted every minute of the day and we don't even know it. A child has been assaulted at least once in their lifetime. Even, if it is a threat from their school or home. I am a firm believer that a child should never be assaulted because it is just a child. At least 1 in 10 were injured in an assault. I think we need to keep a close eye on the children because there is no way that a child should be getting injured and assault. Especially if it is a younger child. What did that young child do to get assaulted in the first place? And, to think that every day a child is getting violently assaulted from a family member or just from a friend. Even to emotional abuse. 1 in 10 suffer from emotional abuse. That is so disgusting that you would even attempt to put down a young child. I found it disgusting that the statistics stated that children see more violence and crime than adults do. And it’s not just seen in public places like schools or communities but in their own homes as well. It’s no shocker than children exposed to these violent tendancies end up resulting to giving into the pressure of committing crimes themselves or even doing drugs. According to this report, research has shown that children that are given an intervention after being exposed to crime are more likely to be saved or rehabilitated than kids that are left alone to think and figure out everything for themselves. They usually don’t figure it out in time to keep themselves out of prison. After all, the bar graph on the next page shows that sixty percent of children have exposure to crime or violence, and guarantee if they are on the statistics, they got arrested at some point. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
While reading the message from the OJJDP they made it very clear that children are more likely to become a victim then a adult. Whether it be at school, home, or in their neighborhood. These exposures to violence can leave a kid traumatized even if the incident wasn't that serious. Being bullied or abused at home can make a kid do the same in return. If a child is exposed to violence at an early age the OJJDP says that they are more likely to be a violent adult in the future. The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence is the most comprehensive effort out right now that measures kids exposure to violence so that it can be more understood so that it can be stopped. The statistics of children that have been exposed to violence or were a victim themselves is startling to say the least. More than one third of the kids in the stud experienced 2 or more direct victimizations in the previous year and more than one and ten experiences 5 or more direct victimizations in the past year. Children that are exposed to violence undergo lasting physical and mental harm. Anxiety and depression are a major side effect after going through some of these heckteck situations that these kids have no control over. The amount of people with anxiety and depression shows that the everlasting effects are changing society for the worst. With anxiety and depression becoming a bigger concern so is prescriptions drugs that are given to these kids to numb the pain from past experiences. The problem is alot bigger then just kids getting bullied at school or kids seeing their parents fight, It is a problem that will follow them to throughout their lives and affect more people than just themselves. When it comes to preventing these things it has shown that identification, intervention, and continued follow up are all valuable strategies to prevent the impact of exposure to violence. By simply giving these children someone to talk to about the things they have witnessed is a great start in relieving some of the pain. The types of trauma that children all across the U.S are facing are physical assault, bullying, sexual victimization, child maltreatment, and being a witness to violence. Nearly 47% of the children involved in the survey were physically assaulted in the past year. To me that is insane, in general boys are more likely to become victims of physical assault. When it comes to bullying it is no surprise that 22% of kids have been physically bullied in their lifetime. The victimization that does the most harm on children would have to be the sexual victimization, 1 out of every 10 children in the survey said that they have been sexually victimized in their lifetime. Which leaves a huge scare in a kids pride and self dignity that can not be fixed easily. It usually leads to counseling and self medication that is definitely not healthy when the self medications is usually a form of drug or alcohol. These victimizations of children are leading to bigger problems in society and I believe that the way they are going about it is great. KLICK123, gh_blackhawks123
All states have established an upper age of original jurisdiction for juvenile court. However states also have various laws that allow a child to be tried as an adult.Some states also have a legal provision which allows the prosecutor to file a juvenile case in both juvenile and adult court because the offense and the age of the accused meet certain criteria. Prosecutorial transfer does not have to meet the due process requirement stipulated by Kent v. U.S. Approximately 15 states currently have this provision, although this number is expected to increase in the next few years. Nearly all states have discretionary judicial waiver provisions that give the court judges the discretion to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles to criminal court. Which in many cases is what happens. In many violent crimes the case is moves from juvenile court to criminal court where the child is tried as an adult and given a adult sentence. In my opinion i do not believe children should be tried as adults unless the crime committed is heinous. The court needs to look at the child's background fro past abuse or victimization before throwing them away for 30 years and expecting them to come out and go ingot society without any problems. Now the amount of children waived to criminal court has drastically wet down since 1994 by 60% but the problem is still real. The cases that are getting worse for juveniles are drug cases. More and more juveniles are getting stuck with drug charges that affect them for the rest of their lives. For most of these kids the drug problem begins with self medication or just a lack of modern day comatitties that kids have (electronics, possessions) if a kid feels left out at school or in his neighborhood he/ she is more likely to sell narcotics then a kids that has those things. Most kids don't start selling drugs for fun, they sell because a lack of something. Now most juvenile drug cases stay in juveniles court but the charge ,may stay on their record depending on the drug and the amount. Most of the cases waived against children were crimes against another person like armed robbery and murder.- KLICK123, gh_blackhawks123
Keeping track of the juvenile arrests year by year is very beneficial and in the case of 2011, it should have brought a fair amount of hope to the juvenile justice system. This should have been the case because arrests in 2011 were down 11 percent from 2010 and down 31 percent since 2002, which is a tremendous improvement. An 11% decrease in just one year is very impressive, and a 31% decrease in juvenile arrests in 8-9 years is extremely impressive as well. A more specific statistic given is the fact that juvenile arrests for violent crime fell 29% in the 5 years leading up to 2011, showing a significant decrease and overall win for the juvenile justice system as a whole. As a result of this, the number of juvenile violent crime arrests in 2011 was less than any of the previous 32 years and 15% less than the previous low point in 1984. While the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles but increased in several offense categories for adults in between 2002 and 2011. Juvenile property crime also declined over the couple years leading up to 2011. Between 1994 and 2006, the number of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests was cut in half, reaching its lowest level since at least 1980. By 2011, the number of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests fell 23%, reaching its lowest level since at least 1980. While these property crimes decreased heavily, there was one subcategory that rose from 2010, and that was arson, which increased by 8%. From 2002-2011, female juvenile arrests declined less than juvenile males, which comes a big surprise to me, because females are usually the lesser of the two. In almost all of the categories, males juvenile arrests decreased more than that of females, and sometimes drastically so, which was true in areas such as simple assault, property crime, larceny, theft, liquor law violations, driving under the influence, and disorderly conduct. Seeing this data goes to show that female juvenile crime is an issue that would need more attention after coming across information such as this. This will most likely not be the case every year, but the numbers being so far apart in comparison is a red flag and should be investigated at further length to find the reason behind such behavior by female juveniles. Even though their overall numbers are most likely lower than the males, the fact that the males are decreasing at a muh greater rate is cause for concern as it pertains to the females. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
Generally speaking, I do not think that the rates of residential placement are extraordinarily high. However, there are four states in which the rates are definitely too high, and from the highest down are: Wyoming (197 per 100,000), West Virginia (175 per 100,000), South Dakota (138 per 100,000) and Nebraska (137 per 100,000). These statistics are representative of all races and ethnicities combined, without any comparison between one or the other. The states listed above clearly need to look into their issue of female crime because they are significantly higher than all of the other states throughout the country. The state that is closest to the numbers that these four states are pushing is North Dakota, and they are nowhere near the high numbers of Wyoming, West Virginia, South Dakota, and Nebraska. North Dakota only has 87 per 100,000, which goes to show just how high those four states really are. In the highest leading state of Wyoming, there were 168 white females in residential placement per 100,000 while there were 315 minority women in residential placement per 100,000, which is by no means a slight difference. This is a major find and a serious issue for not just Wyoming, but a large majority of other states that show similar differences between the two groups. It doesn’t seem likely to me that all minorities simply love getting into trouble while white juveniles do not. There are factors that go along with this such as socioeconomic status and education. There are groups of people from every race and ethnicity that have struggles and factors that lead to misconduct as juveniles, but some groups of people may be more affected than others, and that may be partially what we are seeing in this map. There are always triggers that lead to these juveniles lashing out, there is not a race or ethnicity that are born committing crimes. These behaviors are developed over time, and that is what we need to focus on, and as we see these number differences between races and ethnicities, we need to go after a solution accordingly so that we see improvement throughout the country in every group of people. We need to use and take advantage of the ability to obtain this kind of information to better each and every generation of juveniles. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
Female Placement, The OJJDP have gathered and analyzed statistical data on juvenile’s placement rates throughout the United States. This data shows the statistical relationship between females of many ethnicities and their state’s female residential placement rates per 100,000. The OJJDP have data on the years 1997-2015. This was a very useful tool in really getting a better understanding of the types of patterns you can see throughout the years. While I was examining the article, a few interesting connections could be made. The article points out trends within the ratios between different race or ethnicities. The article mentions that its data concluded that nationally, the ratio of minority to white females was two to one in the likelihood of being in residential placement. This pattern can be seen throughout the years and in certain states. This type of information is critical and useful to law enforcement and public organizations in locating trends and areas to improve on. This can help society and the individuals within the juvenile placement system by providing a fairer and just experience for youth in America. Public organizations could use this data to orchestrate help and aid to juveniles within the residential placement system. Furthermore, placement rates for females were significantly lower than males overall. It would be interesting to compare the different genders in relation to residential placement. Crime is not a one-sided subject, trends within either the male or female population can affect the opposite gender’s population. Overall this article really helps add the research we have been doing on juvenile arrests and how some of those cases may end up transferred to criminal court. Some extreme examples like these help us Improve and refine a system takes time and care to provide a fairer due process. Ghost123, Gymlife123
Arrests-
ReplyDeleteWhile law enforcement departments releasing the juvenile arrest data that they have made, it has helped people look and see how the juvenile justice system is performing and functioning. Practitioners use this data to further evaluate the effectiveness of the delinquency prevention and intervention programs, and the reentry programs. This data can provide an effective way of changing the juvenile offending patters. It can also see if there is any bias to some youth and their races. Overall in 2011 the arrest rate is down eleven percent from 2010 and thirty-one percent since the year of 2002. In 2011 juvenile arrest rates are at their lowest levels in thirty years, many states and communities are trying legislation, new policies, and different practice changes to reduce the amount of juvenile arrest rates even further. There have been new amounts of evidence lately that connects the effects of being involved with the criminal justice system and confinement. These health concerns are there adolescent emotional, mental, behavioral, and their social development as well. So many agencies are developing ways to divert the none serious offenders from even entering the system in the first place. Eventually if this system works, this should result in a new system where arrest of juveniles is rare, all the youth are treated fairly, and if they do enter the juvenile system they will receive much needed treatment and services. This could be a new outcome for youths that are positive for their health, their families, and even the comminutes they live in. The arrest statics that are counted to even have the information for these ideas are coming from the UCR (Uniform Crime Reporting). This is gathered form all law enforcement agencies from the local level to the federal level. It shows the amount of arrests that were made by law enforcement agencies in that specific year. But there is a slight problem with this way of gathering the data. It only shows the amount of people arrested, not the number of crimes committed. If a person committed ten burglaries and are arrested. It only shows the arrest for that one person, not all the crimes that were committed. In a situation, though were one crime is committed and there are many arrests made, it only shows the number of juveniles arrested for that one crime. Juveniles are more likely to commit crimes in groups than adults are. So, there is two ways you can look at the statics. One more draw back about this system is that the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) requires law enforcement agencies to classify an arrest by the most serious offense charged in that arrest. So, a juvenile could get charged with aggravated assault and possession of a weapon. But the arrest would be reported to the FBI as just being charged with aggravated assault, because aggravated assault is a higher more serious crime than possession of a weapon. So, when the FBI shows that in 2011 28,200 arrests of juveniles for a weapon law violation. This means that the weapon law violation was the worst offense. You do not know any of the other charges the person could have had. Trojan 65,Cavs123
I don't really agree that it helps show how well the juvenile justice system is preforming. How can arrest records decipher the difference between success and failure in the system? I don't believe they provide the information to acknowledge or deny the facts. It doesn't tell us if the police are still policing the way they did _____ years ago and if there are more or less juveniles committing crimes. Also arrest records do not show if there is bias towards races of youths. There could be a higher population of Asian kids than whites in Alaska so therefore there is a greater chance that one of them would be more likely to get arrested. This is common sense due to the fact that normally the higher population of a certain race in an area then they are more likely to get arrested. Theoretically the more people you have in area then the more people of that classification will be committing crimes and getting arrested. If we look at Ferguson, MO there is a much higher population of blacks than whites (something like 70% to 20%) and there are more blacks arrested because there are more blacks committing crimes. So we can't really say that arrest records show bias unless there is a new system that takes everything into account. Fireboy123, NDIrish123
DeleteI completely agree with you when you say that if this system works and can result in a newer system where the juvenile arrests are getting rarer, children are being treated equally, and juveniles are receiving the treatment that is there for them and the services are provided correctly that it would be beneficial. It would definitely be healthier for the youth to not be in the environments that they are in and being influenced to commit crimes. The families could benefit in a way I don't think many realize. There are some families that cannot afford to put their children in programs so some parents might appreciate the law taking their children and forcing them to participate in these program and see what else is out in the world other than committing crimes. Communities would definitely feel safer knowing that these children are being taken off the streets and are receiving some type of help. I would also add in that if intervention was done earlier and not after they are in the adult system then our adult population could also be seeing less crimes committed. Sunshine 123 & UofM123
DeleteI kind of agree with you, I feel like the arrest system only showed part of the data. They stop recording some data because they ratings wasn’t that high but I still feel like all crimes should be recorded because even though it’s not that important it’s still happening that people would want that type of information. That part I agree with the most is that they should be putting these kids in programs. Sometimes the parents have a hard time controlling their child and might need a little more help and by the law helping with that, it can make the child better or even make the rates or data decrease. There will not be as much crimes because they are putting these kids away from the things they are doing.-babyblue123
DeleteCases Waived-
ReplyDeleteAll the fifty states have mechanisms to handle juveniles in the court system. All the states have established an upper age of original jurisdiction for the juvenile courts, these ages are 15, 16, or 17. This is all depends on state to state. Also, states have also made laws that allow juveniles younger than the upper age of the juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults. These are only made though with very serious crimes being committed, like murder for example. There are basic types of transfer laws. One of the first ones is concurrent jurisdiction laws, “allow prosecutors discretion on whether they file a case in juvenile or criminal court.” The next is statutory exclusion laws, “Grant criminal courts original jurisdiction over certain classes of cases involving juveniles.” Judicial waiver laws are, “they authorize or require juvenile court judges to remove certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults in criminal court.” For every one-thousand delinquency cases in the United States, only four were waved to criminal court. In 2011, the juvenile jurisdiction of the courts handled more than 1.2 million cases dealing with child delinquency. More than half of those case, exactly 54%, were handed formally. This means that a petition was filled requesting a waiver hearing. Of all the petitioned delinquency cases, only one percent resulted in judicial wavering. The number of judicially waived person offense cases increase 204% between the years of 1985 and 1994. Then it fell juristically between the years of 1994 and 2001. This fell 44% from the peak in 1994. But between the years of 2001 and 2008 the number of cases waived went up by 19%. Then it declined again in the years between 2008 and 2001 by 33%. I believe that it fell like this because the staff of the time might have had different views. Also, the times between these years was a major turning point in our society morally. Just like the 9/11 attack effected the whole nation and forever will. This is part of that change in society. By comparison to his. Waived drug offenses peaked in 1998 481% greater than the year of 1985. Between this peak year of 1998 and 2001, these amount of waived drug offenses declined by 59%. I believe the reason behind this juristic decline was because a lot of law enforcement agencies during this time and still going on today. Really started to crack down on drug usage with the people. Throughout the years of 1985 and 2011 in almost every case. Males where found more likely to be judicially waived to criminal court than females were. Why is this? I believe the reasoning behind this is because there is a lot of discrepancy in the courts. If a female was waived to criminal court over a male more than people would complain that females are getting scrutinized and treated unfair in the courts. Also, I think another reason behind this is because judges look at a female and see them at less of a risk than a male. Trojan65,Cavs123
What is the reason you think that drug offenses that were waived declined? You didn't finish the sentence. I am going to assume you meant to say that courts began to strike down on drug cases. Well if that were the case then wouldn't the number of cases waived have increased?? I also don't agree with saying that 9/11 had anything to do with the waived cases for juveniles. The only thing I could picture this being accurate about is that maybe juvenile courts did not want to flood the adult courts with cases while we began prosecuting terrorists. As if we sent more cases to adult court then less money would be available to prosecute terrorists. Maybe also the fact that juvenile courts were not willing to send more kids to adult court because during this time our courts needed to be wide open to ensure quick and torturous punishment to terrorists. There are a billion theories as to what may have been the cause of waived cases decreasing and increasing, but we can all agree that we will never know 100%. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
DeleteI disagree with you when you say that males were found more likely to be judicially waived to criminal court over females. As an overall statement I believe this is wrong. In the article it stated that both females and males followed the same pattern in general offenses. Maybe the difference or more specific topic that you were trying to get at was that in 2011 males were 4 times more likely to be judicially waived than females in person offense cases. I also believe that just as it should not matter what race you are it also should not matter your gender. I do however agree with the fact that there are problems within our court system. I personally believe that there are some woman out there that are far more dangerous than some of the men out there today. I do not necessarily agree with woman being less risk than a male. Sunshine123 & UofM123
DeleteCases Waived-
ReplyDeleteAll states have a certain upper age of original jurisdiction for juvenile courts which vary from 15-17 depending on the state. States also have various laws that allow younger juveniles of the upper age to be tried as an adult. Concurrent jurisdiction laws allow prosecutors discretion on whether they file a case in juvenile or criminal court. Statutory exclusion laws grant criminal courts original jurisdiction over certain classes of cases involving juveniles. And Judicial waiver laws which authorize or require the juvenile judge to remove certain youth from juvenile court jurisdiction to be tried as adults in criminal court. Nearly all states (45) have discretionary judicial waiver provisions in which juvenile court judges have discretion to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles and refer their cases to criminal court. These laws authorize but do not require transfer in cases meeting threshold requirements for waiver. Some states (15) have presumptive waiver laws which designate a category of cases in which waiver to criminal court is presumed to be appropriate. Other state (15) provide for mandatory waiver in cases that meet certain age, offense or prior record criteria. In 2011 U.S. courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled more than 1.2 million cases. More than half were requesting to be wavered. From 1985 to 2011 the rate of waived cases has fluctuated a lot like a roller coaster. The number of judicially waived person offense case increased by 204% between 1985 and 1994 and then fell substantially through 2001. From 1989 to 1992 petitioned drug offense cases were more likely to be waived to criminal court than any other offense category. This also makes sense for the time because around this time America was in the war on drugs and was taking the drug offenses as number one and everything else second. During this era we were extremely hard on drugs and and drug users and dealers. Drugs were our number one priority especially cocaine because this was the rise of it in our nation. Also males were more likely to be waived then women were. The reason for this could have been because there was more males committing crimes or we just favored the women population this much over our male population. The reasoning behind this could be because there is a lot of discrepancy in the courts. If a female was waived to criminal court over a male more than people would complain that females are getting scrutinized and treated unfair in the courts. Also, I think another reason behind this is because judges look at a female and see them at less of a risk than a male. In 1985 there was 62% more white people that were being waived that there was of any other race (Black- 36%, Other- 2%). This was very shocking to me because everyone says that the reason to our prisons having more black males than white is because of the war on drugs. Everyone thinks that black males are the trouble makers in our society and yes there may be more of them in our prison and jail systems but that doesn't mean that every black male is the same as those. Based on my personal experiences some black males I have came into contact with during my job is some of the nicest people I have met and dealt with. We shouldn't just assume and label every black male the same as ones that have been arrested. Everyone is different and has different lives so we can't think that two people are identical because no two people are, even twins they both act differently and have different experiences. NDIrish123, Fireboy123.
I disagree when you stated the reason for women not being waived to criminal court was because people would complain. It was simply because males were committing more of the violent crime then women were. Don't get me wrong women were committing crime just as much but they were committing more victim-less crimes the men. I do agree with you that there is a persona against black males that they are all the same as the ones in prison and that people stereotype black males more because their are more of them in prison. In my opinion that is just a lack of education among society that will never be fixed. Klick123 Blackhawk123
DeleteArrests
ReplyDeleteThis article opens up with the importance of juvenile arrest data. It is essential to keep records of all juvenile arrests made in order to better the system. It is the best way to physically look at data and conclude what trends are being made. One thing that stood out to me was how juvenile arrests have been down in 2011 by 11% from 2010. This is clear indication that analyzing the data collected has help the system find ways to help juveniles. I agree that getting involved in the system and confinement can have damaging affects on a juvenile’s health. Emotionally and physically being kept in confinement is only going to do more harm than good in the long run. I believe that giving the youth much-needed treatment and services when entered into the system would benefit everyone. Because most of the information comes from the UCR program there are limitations. When crimes are reported to the UCR only the most serious crime in the offense is collected. This means that we are not getting the full amount of offenses committed. I believe it is important to know what the criminal committed and not just their most serious offense. While looking at the number of arrest in 2011 on page 3 some interesting results stood out to me. In 2011 the total estimated number of juvenile arrest was 1,470,000. Out of the 1,470,000 twenty-seven percent were younger than 15 and sixty-six percent were white. Out of the most serious offenses the property crime index had the most overall the other categories. It is great to see that juvenile arrest for violent crimes fell 29%, however, other offenses did rise because of this. Most of the serious offenses have been at an all time low since 2011. Such categories include rape, aggravated assault, and murder. However, since the overall assert rate for juveniles have decreased, these offenses for adults have increased. I don’t understand what could be the correlation with juvenile arrest vs adults, but looking at the chart on page 4 you can see how the do go hand and hand with each other. Gender wise I would assume that males would commit most of the juvenile crimes. This article stated that 429,000 arrest were females younger than 18 in 2011. One statistic that stood out to me was that in 2011 fifty-one percent of violent crimes involved black youth and forty-seven involved white youth. Both races were relatively close in numbers for violent crimes. In total for the most serious offense black represent 13% and whites 11%. Overall it is clear that juvenile arrest trends have declined in all categories over the years. I believe this is due to research and making corrections to the system in order to keep juveniles out of trouble and into the right hands to become a better citizen in our society. Keeping them locked up isn’t going to change them as a person and is only going to make matters worse. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I agree that keeping juveniles in confinement generally will do more harm than good in the long run. However, in some cases, I think that confinement is the only route that will be effective in straightening out certain juveniles. The dumb teenagers that make bonehead mistake once or twice do not need to be confined by any mean, but when we see a juvenile commit crime after crime, a little bit of time served will do a lot more good than bad as time progresses. There was a teenager that I grew up around that never stayed out of trouble for very often, and a little bit of time in confinement has seemed to straighten them right up, and there hasn't been any trouble since then, so I think in some cases it is absolutely beneficial. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
DeleteVictims
ReplyDeleteReading this article was very disheartening. It is well know that there is child abuse everywhere. What is not known is the factual numbers unfortunately. There are even times where child abuse of some kind is happening and we don’t even know it. In this article it says that very little is known about the amount of children exposed to violence. This is thought to make or could make a major difference in the numbers because it fails to reveal the full extent of violence towards children. It also fails to account fully for multiple victimizations that many experience and in what category or certain type of violence. Having this information could help determine the extent of a crime they may commit or what crimes they may be vulnerable to. One part of this article that kind of caught my eye was the physical assault section. I say that it kind of caught my eye because it happens all the time but I was unaware of the numbers and when they decrease and when they continue to rise. Per this article almost half (about 46%) of the children that were surveyed were physically assaulted within the last year and more than half (about 56%) had been physically assaulted in their lifetime. I had always thought that the parents or guardians were doing majority of the abuse but according to this article and the surveys that were done, the physical abuse that was peaking during the middle childhood was assaults done by siblings. How anyone would be okay with physically assaulting their sibling blows my mind. Obviously they are being taught that this is okay. The assaults done by siblings decreased or showed a decline after the middle childhood age. Unfortunately the most severe assaults were on the rise steadily with age. In the age group of 14 to 17 is when the physical assaults with injury started coming into play more as well as new forms of violence. A section that this article touched on but was not very elaborate was reaching across disciplines. I completely agree with what little was said here. I think it would help in many ways if when there are calls for domestic abuse and an investigation is done the obvious victims should not be the only ones being looked at. The children if there are any should also be reached out to. There may not be any apparent abuse but if that child is constantly seeing the different abuses happening right in front of them, they may be at a higher risk to start doing the same abuses if not more severe to someone in the future. If the different agencies can work together it could help prevent or decrease the number of children becoming delinquent as they get older. Getting others in the children's life involved such as school teachers and child care providers could also play a big role as they could help identify if there may be an issue before anything happens based on the way these children interact with one another on different levels doing different types of activities. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I agree that we cannot be absolutely sure of the realistic numbers of child abuse that happen throughout the country. There is too much that goes unreported due to a list of reasons. Kids do not fully understand situations like this, and will most likely not report the abuse that they are going through as a child, or even a young adult. I also find it interesting that a pretty large chunk of the abuse comes from siblings. Of course I understand the reality of picking on each other, because I went through plenty of that, but actual abuse was never a real issue, so that statistic is definitely a bit surprising to me. gh_blackhawks123, KLICk123
DeleteI completely agree, its so many people in this world getting abused. Not knowing about these things is heart breaking in a way because you never know it could be happening every day and now as we speak. Not only are kids being abused but emotionally they are abused because they have lost someone that they were close to and they don’t have that person any more to look up to. Even internet plays a big part because the internet has so much power in so many ways. Kids get bullied left and right and never know what they are going through at home. It’s so easy to give your opinion or talk about someone in a computer or phone because you’re not in front of those people or person. It’s so sad what kids go through and no one really knows and I agree, some of these should go surveyed because it could still be going on. -babyblue123
DeleteWavier
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article "Delinquency Cases Waived to Criminal Court, 2011" off of the OOJDP (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention) website, I came across some very interesting facts or numbers. The first thing that I found interesting was the types of transfer laws. It was interesting to me because I did not know about them. There are three basic types of transfer laws: concurrent jurisdiction law, statutory exclusion law, and judicial waiver law. A basic description of those laws are that concurrent jurisdiction law allow prosecutors discretion, statutory exclusion law grants criminal courts original jurisdiction, and judicial waiver law authorizes or requires juvenile court judges to remove youth from juvenile court and be tried as an adult. The even more interesting thing is the broad categories inside the judicial waiver. The three categories are discretionary, presumptive, and mandatory. The most common among the states, 45 states, is discretionary judicial waiver. The discretionary judicial waiver allows the juvenile court judges to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles and refer their cases to criminal court. I personally believe that if the juvenile court judges have discretion it could help some of these children. I think it could help in more than one way as if the judge has dealt with the same delinquent over and over again and can see that they do not want to change or get help that person does not deserve to keep getting more chances and risk a more severe action being done. On the other hand if a delinquent has never been in trouble or been in the system giving that person another chance should be given based upon the offense. Obviously murder and stealing something are two very different offenses. Something else that I found very interesting was the numbers that were recorded and the differences between 1985 and 2011. Between these years, 1985 and 2011, petitioned person offense cases was the most likely to be judicially waived than any other offenses. The fact that juveniles or children are committing more person and drug crimes than any other crime is flat out disgusting. Almost every child if not every child has committed some type of "crime". Anything from stealing a dollar from their parents, drinking alcohol under age, smoking under age, skipping school, ect. These are all considered crimes but they are not really hurting anyone just curious things that kids do. When it comes to committing crimes towards other individuals to inflict harm on them or doing drugs those are things that kids are not just "curious" about in my opinion. I believe that these kinds of crimes are done because there is something else going on. Whether it be their living conditions or they are looking up to someone else that is doing these crimes, these children are somewhere somehow seeing or being told that it is okay when it is far from that. When these children are influenced so young it is harder for the law or law enforcement to in a way scare them straight. Sunshine123 & UofM123
I completely agree with you when you said that the judges should have a little discretion. If a juvenile is always being put into the juvenile court system and the judge sees that, I believe that they should get a little harsher punishment. Also, when you said that the one kid that comes into the court system for something for their first time, they should get a little punishment involved with it just for them to realize that whatever they are committing is not worth it. So, this way hopefully they will think twice before ever committing some sort of crime again. I agree when you say that all kids have committed some sort of crime which is smoking underage, drinking, taking a few dollars from their parents. That is something every child will do sometime. But why do you think people think it is ok for their children to go out and steal and commit delinquent acts? Trojan65, Cavs123
DeleteDemographics-
ReplyDeleteThere are three states that are far above every other state and those are Wyoming, Nebraska, South Dakota, and West Virginia. These states female residential placement rates by race/ethnicity (per 100,000 female juveniles) 2015. are anywhere between 122 to <= 197. This really surprises me because when we think of Nebraska, Wyoming and South Dakota we think of no one living out there and it being a very quite and lonesome state especially Wyoming. The states populations are Wyoming- 585,501, South Dakota- 865,454, Nebraska- 1.907 million, West Virginia- 1.831 million. Also when we think of these states we don't think of anything being there for example Wyoming and Nebraska all we think about is cornfields and nothingness and in South Dakota we think of a hilly empty land that is sparsely inhabited. Now in Illinois we have Chicago and Springfield as some examples of what people think about when they think of our state well also us being broke also. In these states this is a very high rate of female residential placement I think knowing that these states don't have a huge population. For every 100,000 non-Hispanic black female juveniles in the population, 110 were in residential placement on October 28, 2015; for Hispanic females the rate was 44, and for non-Hispanic white females it was 32. The residential placement rate is the number of female juveniles in residential placement per 100,000 female juveniles age 10 through the upper age of original juvenile jurisdiction in each state. Nationally the ratio of the residential placement rate for minority females to that for white females was two to one. In 30 states and the District of Columbia the placement rate for non-Hispanic black females exceeded the rate for all other race/ethnicity groups. Nationally, the placement rates for females were substantially lower than the corresponding rates for males. For example the overall placement rate for females was 47 per 100,000 female juveniles in the population. In comparison the placement rate for males was 253 per 100,000 male juveniles. This surprises me with the female rate. Overall I thought the male rate would have been higher by a big margin because we think all males commit crimes and females are always the victims but we are wrong. That's not meant to be mean but females should be held just as liable as males and treated the same way to have fairness and equality across the board. Just because someone is just a different sex doesn't mean we should treat them differently. Also they are the majority to. Of the 2010 Census population, 157.0 million were female (50.8 percent) while 151.8 million were male (49.2 percent). Between 2000 and 2010, the male population grew at a slightly faster rate (9.9 percent) than the female population (9.5 percent). Other than these four states nationwide it is pretty equal the rates are. There is no other states I see that have such a variation like the four states I have listed in this comment. NDIrish123, Fireboy123.
Arrest
ReplyDeleteI find this article to be very interesting because it says, “Although Juvenile arrest rates for many crimes are at their lowest levels in more than 30 years, many states and communities are instituting legislative, policy, and practice changes to reduce juvenile arrest even further”. Meaning they are still trying to do everything they can do to make sure it stays like that. Which is a good idea, so everyone can be safe and wont over crowd the place with juveniles. Also, In the article they say they are trying to make sure when the youth enter the system, he or she receives much-needed treatment and services. I agree with this statement because in the past they have been charging these juveniles as adults when it should be nowhere near what they charge adults because are still young minded. It would undoubtedly provide positive and healthy outcomes for youth, families, and communities. Another thing that was interesting was the Arrest Statistics. Arrest statistics are most appropriately a measure of entry into the justice system. They use this system if the juveniles have any charges in their name at once and they take the most bad one and arrest them. I feel like that it’s a good system because some charges are meant to be let alone. -babyblue123
Victims
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be an eye opener because without these surveys you would never know what kids or teenagers go through. The fact they are expose to violence every day in their homes or schools anywhere is very interesting. In the article, it says that our society children are exposed to violence in their daily lives. It says that 60 percent of the children surveyed were exposed to violence within the past year, either directly or indirectly. Meaning they would be getting abused at home by family member. Boyfriend or anyone they know. Also, indirectly by someone sending the, threats or saying things about them, such as bullying them every day at school. Social media plays a big part because teens can say anything they want other a phone or computer and not feel bad or thing about anyone feelings. Another interesting thing in the article it says “Even if they are not physically present, children may be affected by intentional harm done by a murder or assault on a family member or a close neighbor. It can mentally harm someone when they have lost someone they are close to because they cared about them so much. It’s so many ways people can be exposed to violence and it’s sad. -babyblue123
Wavier
ReplyDeleteI found a lot found a lot of interesting things in this article. I learned that a Judicial waiver occurs when a juvenile court judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult judge transfers a case from juvenile to adult court in order to deny the juvenile the protections that juvenile jurisdictions provide. The youngest offender who can be waived to adult is a 17or 18- year-old. But, in some states the age is as low as 13 or 14. In the article it says the at male person offense cases were far more likely to be judicially waived than cases than cases in any other offense category. Meaning not only did they have the official power to make legal decisions and judgements but they could have a juvenile be tried as adults in criminal court. Which person offense can be a robbery, rape, assault, or a homicide. And as for female drug offense cases were most likely to be waived. -babyblue123
Females
ReplyDeleteWomen are more likely than men to be in prison for fraud and robbery, while men are more apt to have committed violent crimes. Also, men were more likely to have been locked up for murder, rape or sexual assault. Almost 13 percent of men were jailed on murder charges and 13 percent for rape or sexual assault, while 11 percent of female inmates were there on murder charges and 2 percent for rape or sexual assault. Even though male commits most of the crimes females still have a little bit to do with these crime rates. Women are also being imprisoned at a faster rate than men these days. The number of women prisoners sentenced to more than a year in state or federal facilities grew by almost 3 percent between 2012 and 2013, while the increase in male inmates was 0.2 percent. While nearly two-thirds of women under probation supervision are white, nearly two-thirds of those confined in local jails and State and Federal prisons are minority & black, Hispanic and other races. Hispanics account for about 1 in 7 women in State prisons but nearly 1 in 3 female prisoners in Federal custody. -babyblue123
Arrest
ReplyDeletePart 1
The OJJDP provides an accurate and very informative data report regarding juvenile arrests and statistical data on what types of offenses caused those arrests. However, since the OJJDP utilizes the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s UCR program to provide its data, we can only see data on certain offenses in relations to arrests only if the offense being shown was the most serious offense during that arrests. Once again we can see potential problems with the limited UCR program in that we can’t quite paint a whole picture when it comes to crimes being committed and reported simply by using the UCR. Nonetheless, I found many interesting data points during my reading. One of the most alarming data analysis points was the correlation that between 2002 and 2011 the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles, but increased for adults. This correlation seems to have some sort of social causations. It could be possible that many of these juveniles are aging into adult offenders. Since the report is categorizing juveniles as younger than 18 it is possible than through 2002 to 2011 juveniles are crossing the threshold of 18 years of age and are still offending. This has to be in relation to the 20/80 rule we learned about in class as well. Perhaps there is fluctuations appearing over the span of the last decade. Furthermore, I found that female arrests have been decreasing at a slower pace than male arrests in several offense categories. This is reflective in both adults and juveniles regarding gender arrest ratios. Some examples of offense categories in which females are decreasing less than males are aggravated and simple assault, larceny theft, liquor law violations, and even disorderly conduct. This is interesting due to our tendency to link most crimes to mostly males. It is unclear to me as to why female arrest rates aren't dropping quicker than males but it could be somewhat due to the increase of female recognition and importance in the social aspects of society as we make progress in equality. It will be interesting to revisit these statistics in the future years to see new patterns unfold and how they relate to older ones. Ghost123, Gymlife123
Arrest
ReplyDeletePart 2
The juvenile arrest data provided by this article show that there are reasons for encouragement. In 2011, the overall arrest rates of juveniles had declined 11 percent from the previous year and down even further at 31 percent since the year 2002. In 2011, there were an estimated 190,900 juveniles arrested on the charge of simple assault. Of these juveniles, about one-third were represented by females and about 39% involved youths under the age of 15 and nearly 60% involved white youths. Juveniles under the age of 15 accounted for about 57% of all juvenile arrests for arson in 2011 and 40% of juvenile arrests for simple assault, vandalism, and disorderly conduct. Females only accounted for less than 10% of the juvenile arrest rates for murder, but accounted for nearly 25% of aggravated assault arrests. After a decade of declines between the years 1994 and 2004, the juvenile arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses increased the following two years and then began to decline each year through 2011. With the exception of aggravated assault, juvenile arrests for violent crimes hit historic lows in 2011. After a 33% decline since 2008, the number of juvenile robbery arrests in 2011 was at its lowest level since 1980. The arrest rates for rape also fell 33% since 2004. Between 2002 and 2011, the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles but increased for adults in several offense categories. The Property Crime Index arrest rates for juveniles were cut in half between 1994 and 2006. By the year 2011, the number of Property Crime Index arrests dropped 23%. Between 2008 and 2011, juvenile arrests went down for individual property offenses such as burglary at 26%, larceny-theft at 21%, and motor vehicle theft at 44% and arson at 24%. 429,000 females under the age of 18 were arrested in 2011. From 2002 to 2011, the arrests of females decreased less than that of their male counterparts in several categories of offenses. For instance, between 2002 and 2011, adult male arrests for aggravated assault dropped 16%, while the rate for females only dropped about 1%. Ghost123, Gymlife123
Victim,
ReplyDeleteWe know that exposure to violence can have many negative affects on a person's life. This is especially true when people are exposed to violence at a young age. The OJJDP have utilized surveys to collect data on such exposures and have tried to isolate patterns and causes of such violences. The NatSCEV, or National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence, aims to provide a more complete and accurate picture of children and the types of violence they are exposed to throughout their lifetime. Some of the types of violence surveyed include, internet harassment, assault, and bullying. The victimization these children experience when in contact with violence repeatedly over the course of their lives can have dramatic consequences. Victimized children can sometimes turn to crime as they get older and have trouble forming bonds with others. There is also the risk that these children will have problems finding a partner and have issues with their parenting abilities as well. Chronic violence within a child's life could cause him or her to transfer their victimization to their children causing a new generation of victimized children. In 2008 alone at least 46.3 percent of surveyed children were assaulted. Reports of lifetime exposure to violence were generally about 33 to 50 percent higher in 2009 than compared to 2008. This is an alarming report that could indicate that even now in 2017 the violence among children continues to grow. This growth could be escalated with children's growing connection with media outlets like never before. We will need to continue tracking violence within the households and provide support and relief for children and their families who are victims of some form of violence. Part 1, Ghost123, Gymlife123
Victims
ReplyDeletePart 2
The National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence, or NatSCEV, is the most comprehensive national survey of the incidence and prevalence of children’s exposure to violence to this date. In this survey which was conducted between January and May of 2008, children were surveyed about their experiences with violence both within the past year and in their lifetimes throughout several major categories of violence such as conventional crime, child maltreatment, victimization by peers and siblings, sexual victimization, witnessing and indirect violence, school threats and violence, and internet victimization. The NatSCEV found that most of our society’s children are indeed exposed to violence in their everyday lives. Over 60 percent of the children who participated in this survey reported that they were exposed to some type of violence within the past year. About half of those participants, 46.3%, said they were assaulted at least once in the past year and over 10% were injured from said assault. Another 25% were either victims of robbery, vandalism, or theft and about 1 in 10 were found to have suffered from child maltreatment which includes both physical and mental abuse, neglect and a family abduction. This survey also discovered that just about seven in eight children that reported having been exposed to violence with the past year also reported that they were experiencing throughout their entire lifetimes. This means that these children are a continuing risk to violent victimization. Unfortunately, children are much more likely than adults to be exposed to violence and crime. In a 2005 survey, children ages 12-19 were found to be more than twice as likely to be victims of violent crimes as that of the entire population as a whole. The results from being exposed to violence can be detrimental to these children. The results have shown that children who are exposed to violence undergo lasting physical, mental, and emotional harm also suffering from difficulties with attachment, regressive behavior, anxiety and depression, and aggression and conduct problems. Even more disheartening is the fact that being exposed to violence could in fact impair a child’s capacity for partnering and parenting later in life, essentially just continuing the cycle of violence into the next generation. Gymlife123, Ghost123
Waiver,
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the article pertaining to delinquency cases waived to criminal court I was surprised to find a few striking bits of information. First off, in 2011, the U.S. courts with juvenile jurisdiction dealt with more than 1.2 million delinquency cases. Of these 1.2 million cases, 54% were handled formally through the use of petitions or waiver hearings pushed by the prosecution. Of all the petitioned caseloads only about 1% resulted in a judicial waiver with a peak in 1994 at 13,600 cases. However, in 2011 juvenile courts waived only 5,400 cases. This drop in waived delinquency caseloads is very noticeable and, by appearance, seems positive. While the drop-in caseloads are partially due to the decline in juvenile violent crime and other lower offense rates, the main reason that struck me as an issue comes from bypass process becoming more and more popular. With the expansion of nonjudicial transfer laws, the judicial system will allow the prosecution to take a case straight to criminal court in effect bypassing juvenile courts altogether. This process gives the prosecution the power to change and affect juveniles lives more harshly if a fair and just process is not provided. As this bypassing process was becoming more popular so was the war on drugs. During the late 1980’s and early 1990’s the U.S. saw a huge spike in drug cases being petitioned to criminal court. This resulted in the incarceration of more juveniles under stricter criminal court punishments. This wave of drug cases is largely due to the unpopular opinions of the public regarding drugs at the time of this spike. Thankfully we have seen a decrease in the amount of drug offense cases being transferred to criminal court over the years. The OJJDP really helps paint a picture of the patterns we have faced as a nation regarding offense types and hopefully as time passes on we will continue to see progress with our juvenile court waiver processes. As prosecutors gain more and more of the advantage against juveniles it is yet to be seen whether or not our juveniles will truly have a fair and just judicial system in the future. Part 1 Ghost123, Gymlife123
I agree with you that we will see a decrease in the amount of drug cases being transferred to criminal court. I made this point in my blog that it isn't fair to have a drug offense on your permanent record as a juvenile. You have your whole life ahead of you, and i'm glad they're finally focusing more on persons crimes and property crimes rather than the drug crimes. I also agree with you that prosecutors should be more understanding towards the juvenile that has committed a crime. They should have reduced power in the judiciary system. -Arthur123 DC123
DeleteI agree with you that we will see a decrease in the amount of drug cases being transferred to criminal court. I made this point in my blog that it isn't fair to have a drug offense on your permanent record as a juvenile. You have your whole life ahead of you, and i'm glad they're finally focusing more on persons crimes and property crimes rather than the drug crimes. I also agree with you that prosecutors should be more understanding towards the juvenile that has committed a crime. They should have reduced power in the judiciary system.-babyblue123
DeleteI agree, it’s not fair what they charge juveniles. Like a drug case, why would you want a drug case to be on their records for their whole life. They have their whole life ahead of them and maybe could fix themselves if you help them get on the right track and give them a chance. I feel like shouldn’t always focus on drugs because there are worst things happening out there than just selling drugs -and drug use.-babyblue123
DeleteWaivers
ReplyDeletePart 2
From 1989 to 1992, petitioned drug offense cases were more likely to be waived to criminal court than that of any other offense category. In 1991, the proportion of drug offense cases that were judicially waived peaked at about 3.6% with a total of 1,500 cases and then declined to under 1% in 2011. In 2011, 1.4% of formally handled person offense cases were waived compared with 0.9% of drug offense cases, 0.7% of property offense cases, and 0.3% of public order offense cases. Person offense cases accounted for a bigger proportion of the waived caseload that property offense cases beginning in 1993. What was also interesting was that although the proportions of waived cases involving females and younger juveniles increased a little bit between 1985 and 2011, the vast majority of waived cases involved males over the age of sixteen. However, between those same years, the proportion of waived cases involving males went down from 95% to 92%. Also so did the proportion of waived cases involving juveniles over the age of sixteen, dropping from 94% to 92%. During the 1980’s and 1990’s, transfer laws proliferated and expanded dramatically. Nearly every state legislature revised or rewrote their laws to broaden the lens of transfer; lower age and/or offense thresholds, move away from individual and toward categorical handling, and shifting authority from judges to prosecutors. Gymlife123, Ghost123
Violence
ReplyDeleteIn the article that speaks about children becoming exposed to violence, but it only is a survey that took five months to complete. This is weird because most surveys or counts look at data collected over a year period. The study seems to be a pretty good baseline for exposure to violence because it wants to discover the violence at home, school and in their communities. I am surprised that this is the first ever survey to attempt to compile data on where children are exposed to violence. You would think something similar to this would have been done well before 2008. It is not surprising that the majority of children are exposed to violence; I think this is quite the understatement as I would be confident to say that one hundred percent of children have been exposed to violence at some point in their lives. Of course when the study looked at overall violence in the kids’ entire lives there was a large increase in the number of violence exposures. What is crazy is that children are more likely than adults to be exposed to violence; this is not good for the child’s development. Looking at the broad picture this isn’t a good sign for kids, but look at me I was exposed to violence my entire childhood and I turned out all alright. So there are some children that will be more affected by violence than others, this all depends on the violent situation and the child’s mind. I am glad that it states that most of the time children are not extremely affected by the violence they are exposed to, they are rather resilient to it. The study found that the earlier a child was able to receive help according to the violence they witnessed then they had a lot less likelihood of having issues stemming from the event. The violence that the study covers is pretty much any violence that just about anyone could ever be exposed to. So it covers all the bases needed to paint an accurate picture. As usual the study is not able to paint an entire picture because it fails to cover every single juvenile in the entire country. It is still able to provide adequate information on what the entire population of juveniles has likely been exposed to. Previous studies that have attempted to cover violence like this study did not succeed in providing much quality info because they focused on very specific types of violence. What is shocking is that one of these studies actually asked the children and caregivers about violence exposure. Is this a joke? Why would the caregiver be truthful if they committed or exposed the child to violence? Also how would they be an accurate representation of all the violence the child has been exposed to? It’s not like they are with the child twenty four seven for seventeen years and 364 days! Therefore it is great that a new study came out in 2008 that was actually accurate and provided beneficial info. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
I too found it strange that the survey only took 5 months to complete. It makes me question how valuable the information must be if it was gathered in a hurry. The way I think about it is, not all the answers to the test will be correct if it was rushed through and not everything in the questions was ready carefully enough. I agree with you when you stated that the study wasn't able to paint the entire required picture because it doesn't cover all the ground. Meaning, that not all of the juveniles in America were not accounted for in this survey. It really is a good thing that they updated the information by putting out and completely a new survey to possibly replace this current one. It’s true that they wouldn’t know the exact details of something like the amount of violence that a child is exposed to because not every child is monitored constantly to be able to see all the violence that they have to witness for themselves. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
DeleteArrests
ReplyDeleteThe article about juvenile arrests in 2011; claims that it captures the performance of the juvenile justice system, which I find to be false. How can arrest records tell us how well the juvenile justice system is performing? They do nothing to say that we are doing a better job at arresting juveniles or not. It also claims that it can tell how well our government is doing at the prevention of delinquency. How does the OJJDP know that less delinquency is occurring when quite frankly those specific juveniles may just be getting away with their crimes now more so than ever before? Sure the arrests in 2011 were down eleven percent from the previous year, but that doesn’t mean our government was more effective at preventing delinquency. It is good to hear that many governments are trying to reduce the number of arrest able offenses for juveniles to avoid sending them into the system in the first place. This gives them a better chance at learning from their mistakes and never entering the system later on in life. Of course the arrest statistics are not the most accurate pieces of information out there, but they can be if you understand the way juveniles are likely to commit crimes, i.e. in groups. So you could get somewhat skewed info if you failed to realize that one specific crime was committed by many individual juveniles. Such as when Dr. White did his sting operation, had he pressed charges on the juveniles a huge jump in the arrest of one specific crime (multiple different ones though) would have occurred. A surprising fact is that one and a half million juveniles were arrested in 2011. This is not an acceptable number as there are some crimes that should not result in arrest such as the one thousand arrests from gambling alone. Really? Gambling is not a crime that should be arrest able for a freaking child! Prostitution should not get a child arrested! It should get them the help they desperately need for goodness sakes! We need to focus on the complete BS that kids are being arrested for and fix it, instead of providing reports on it. Sure it’s good that juvenile arrests for violent crimes are decreasing, but the real question is if juveniles are just getting away with them more so than before? Look at Chicago, they only go up in the murder rate every year, I bet they have plenty of kids pulling the trigger and not getting arrested for it! This is foolishness and is not an accurate representation of what really is going on behind the closed doors. Another thing that trips me up is that there is a disclaimer under all the arrest counts saying that arrest records were not available for Hawaii. This is not acceptable as that means the entire arrest record counting for the United States was not quite ‘entire’. Therefore I just found an error that makes this entire study invalid in the study of statistics! How can these fools say the arrest count for juveniles is decreasing in the U.S. when they don’t even utilize every single state? Yes Hawaii is a state! I don’t need to say anything else to make my point proven. The counts provided are flawed….. Fireboy123 NDIrish123
Arrests-
ReplyDeleteAccording to the article juvenile arrests for violent crime declined for the fifth consecutive year, as of 2011. The FBI assessed the trends in violent crimes by looking at four major offenses. Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape , robbery and aggravated assault. One thing I noticed was that between the years 1994 and 2004 it was a juvenile crime decline, but the crime increased between years 2004-2006. As a result, the number of juvenile violent crime arrests in 2011 was less than any of the previous 32 years and 15% less than the previous low point in 1984. Also another thing I read was that 1 and 5 juvenile violent crime arrests involved females and more than half involved minority youth. Females contributed to 29% of juvenile arrests in 2011. Law enforcement made 429,000 arrests of females younger than age 18 in 2011. Between 2002 and 2011, females were mostly getting arrested for motor vehicle theft according to the violent crime index. Females with 72% and males with 69%. The second highest crime females got arrested for was DUI. 39% females and 57% males. These are all females and males that are about 15 to maybe about 24. To the minority side of things, it says that the U.S. juvenile population composed of juvenile between aged 10-17 in 2011 was 76% white, 17% black Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2% American Indian. More than half of all juveniles arrests for violent crimes in 2011 involved black youth and 47% involved white youth. For property crime arrests, the proportion was 62% white and 35% black. According to the article Black youth were overrepresented in juvenile arrests. The black proportion of juvenile arrest in 2011 chart, says that most black youth were arrested for robbery (68%) and murder (54%). In another chart it states how some juveniles were involved in about 1 in 13 arrests for murder and about 1 in 5 arrests for robbery burglary and larceny-theft. One thing that really surprised me was that everybody committed Arson. Arson , was the leading category under the property crime index (42%). That's just really shocking to me. It says males commit about 43% ,female 34% and black and white youth both at 42%. It is just really to me how in 2011 the highest juvenile arrests percentage was for Arson. I just wouldn't think it would be that much arson going on between all groups of juveniles. 42% is a big number compared to all the other crimes on the index. DC123 Arthur123
I too was surprised about the rates of arson in the statistics. I always knew that children had a fascination with fire, it's just a scary thine to think about that so many children were trying to set the world on fire. It did make me wonder about how many of those cases were just children playing fire and accidentally starting an uncontrollable fire, because I personally know some young pyros that would most certainly be in jail right now had there not been an adult present to control and maintain the fires they were starting. Though it can also be very purposeful. I had a cousin try to blow up the house when he was 9 by swinging an axe at a gas line then trying to use a lighter to light it up. Had he been able to actually use the lighter he had taken from his dads desk, he might have succeeded in lighting the house on fire. Do I know why he did it? Not a real clue. He claimed it was because the basement was too dark and he needed light to see. I couldn't understand his logic but it's made me think about these statistics because some of those arrests could have been accidental and some of them could have been on purpose, or some of them could have even been intentional but confused and done because they didn't know what they were doing was dangerous. Anyway, its hard to tell, but an interesting statistic to think about. SomethingProfound123, illini123, ws123
DeleteWaiver
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the Delinquency Cases Waived article, I found out that each state has their own way to handle juvenile cases in the judiciary system. As far as transfer laws go, I think that the concurrent transfer law is the most effective because the other two basically say that if the case is bad enough, you automatically go to criminal court, or in other words to be tried as an adult. Some states allow you to be tried as an adult at age 15! Depending on the crime committed that is scary stuff to think about. Now as far as judicial waivers go, I have to say that I believe in discretionary judicial waivers for good reason. Like I said before, juvenile delinquents should only be tried as adults depending on the crime committed. Let's take smoking marijuana as a juvenile for example. Like we talked about in class, it is definitely a crime under the law to possess or be under the influence of marijuana, but are the kids really a dangerous criminal who is a danger to society? Probably not. This kind of crime should not be taken out of juvenile court into criminal court, whereas a crime like vandalism, theft, rape, or murder should be treated as if the juvenile was an adult. A small crime isn't worth ruining a teenagers chance of having an opportunity at getting a job later in life. It seems like they're not doing a bad job of keeping juveniles out of the criminal court either because the article says for every one thousand cases only four were waived to criminal court. Especially now a days because according to the graph in the article, drug waivers went down and property and persons crimes went up (this is a good thing in my opinion). The thing that was the most irritating about the article was the graph on the back that showed the waivers of certain ethnicity groups. For a majority of the crimes committed (Drugs, Person, Property, Public Order) the most cases that were waived into criminal court were black people. Like we talked about in class, the majority of people committing crime in the United States are white people, but somehow the black people are the ones getting caught more, and the ones who are being convicted more. Is it because the majority of black people are caught more, or is it part of a race bias in the judiciary system? Even though the number of crimes decreased in the past 20 years, it's sad to see the profiling occurring in these instances. Also crime committed according to your sex? It makes sense that males commit more crimes than females, but the gap in the articles graph shows a HUGE difference between opposite sexes. I believe it is because males are outside more, and are also targeted over females. Really it's nature to think that females are more innocent than males, but I believe there needs to be tougher enforcement against women who are always seen as the victim in law enforcement, or in the judicial system. Arthur123 DC123
I agree that it is scary to imagine being tried as an adult at the age of 15. Even though the committed a horrible crime, this just shows that that child needs to be placed in treatment and not go to criminal court. With your point about juveniles smoking marijuana I do believe it isn’t a huge danger to society and that it shouldn’t be taken to court, I do believe something should be done about it so the juvenile does not go down the wrong path. Small crimes shouldn’t ruin their lives either because everyone makes mistakes in their life, especially as a young teen. I believe that most of the time where you’re doing these small crimes makes a huge difference. Like you said in class most of the time a white child is most likely in an area where cops are not most present. Overall, it’s important to take into consideration all the circumstances in a juvenile’s life before making big decisions. Sunshine123 & UofM123
DeleteI completely agree that juveniles should only be committed based on the level of crime they committed. Sometimes, the punishment is completely unfair to the child because they could intentionally trial them as an adult for the crime committed but had they trailed them as a juvenile the punishment might not have been as severe. I mean, even rehabilitation could possibly work if it was at such an early age, even if it was as severe of a crime as murder or rape. However, crimes like marijuana possession or petty theft could easily be rehabilitated instead of institutionalized. It could affect their life drastically in the long run. Once a juvenile has a record and is labeled a criminal, it makes everything for their future so much harder, especially when trying to get a job. If anything, this information could really be used to put a stop to more people in the future from committing the same crimes. SomethinProfound123, ws123, illini123
DeleteArrests-
ReplyDeleteIt was shocking to see that even so long ago in 2011, the rate for arresting kids was so high. The number recorded, 1.5 million kids, which is considered persons under the age of 18, were arrested. However, when it stated that the number recorded in 2011 was less than what was recorded in 2002, I was relieved but shocked at the same time. 1.5 million is a crazy number to begin with. I can’t imagine how bad it must have been in 2002 if it was more than 2011. This means that we can have hope for our younger generations and hopefully they can keep the trend going in this direction until we have the arrest rates down close to zero. When looking at the chart on page three I noticed that one of the highest percentage decrease since 2002 was that motor vehicle theft was down by sixty nine percent. Seeing that makes me think that kids are starting to learn from either other people who may have been arrested for these crimes or they may just not want to do these types of crimes anymore. One stat that did stick out to me was that from 2010 to 2011 the percent change for arson had gone up by eight percent. Even though it is still a category that has an overall low arrest rate we still need to learn from this and figure out how to decrease this stat. I feel since the arrest rates are down maybe more kids are going to not fear cops anymore and find out that cops are the good guys. It’s just a shame to know that many children were getting arrested. I couldn’t believe the fact that the category larceny theft had the largest number of arrests compared to all the others, aside from the category labeled ‘other’. The categories were just outrageous. The fact that there were categories for things like drug abuse, sex offense, rape and murder just blew my mind. I didn’t think children were capable of such things. You would think that those would be things adults would commit. I’m sure this same format goes for recording adult criminal behavior as well but it doesn’t make this any less shocking. I did find it strange they had one columns of percentages specifically for white people. Why don’t they include percentages for all the races on here? I understand they have other reports for the races but it just seems strange to me. I find it good that all the rates have begun to decrease over time from times like 2002. I feel this report is good for showing some detail into the rates of arrests and the things that they are arrested for but it could use some more information or detail, maybe add in more than just a white percentage. That was just the first graph though. This report goes on to talk about the violent crime decrease and it showed line graphs of violent crime. Apparently, in 2011, it was at its lowest in history. It’s been 6 years since this report was made. I wonder what they are like today, whether they have gone up or down. The arrest rate in 2011 for weapons is so high. I think that is so crazy because even though they predicted that the young would commit more crimes than adults, it still just amazes me. 28,200 arrests in 2011 that is a considerable number. Other offenses in 2011 were charged, but were charged for a lesser offense. How though? There were 1.5 million arrests in 2011 for people that were under the age of 18. That just mean the kids that were getting arrested were clearly not in school and had a lot of free time. They were not being watched by their parents. Juvenile arrest for violent crimes fell 29% in the past 5 years. How did they fell? What was being done to get the numbers down. The report for this is recent because it is back in 2011, and it's only 2017. Within that few time frame youths have been doing good. They have been at least staying out of the police eye, and staying out of trouble. SomethingProfound123, illini123, ws123
Women-
ReplyDeleteI think that it’s important to understand that women are just as bad as men, sometimes even worse. They can commit crimes just as much as the next person and these statistics from 2015 really show this. Well that and it also shows how the state they are in can affect the rate or crimes that are committed. While looking at the graphs and seeing that in 2015 there were over forty-eight thousand juveniles in prison is good because if we look at the late nineties we can see that the number is starting to decrease which is what we want a country. When looking at the percent of females and seeing that females make up fifteen percent, I would assume that over half of them in placement facilities are actual victims as we discussed the victim/offender. Seeing the graph for placements by race what most of us believe to be true is because more blacks are in placement facilities than any other race just like blacks make up a higher percentage of prisoners today they make up the highest percentage of juveniles too. Also for females who are in these placement facilities it is the exact same as males the higher percentage of race is blacks and the lowest percentage is whites. I know that reading from other articles that the percent difference is starting to close in and we are starting to see less of a gap between whites and other races. Why were the Hispanic and minority women the highest? Are they saying that those 2 types of people are the worse than any other? Because, if so that is kind of terrible to do. I would imagine that all ethnics would be on the same level. Just because one group is a tone darker or a tone lighter doesn’t mean that they are any better than the next one. White females in my eyes commit just as much crime as a black female. I would have imagined that Latina women would keep a low profile, but to see that their number was high kind of shocked me. Not saying that they should be put on a pedestal or anything but it is messed up that their number is relatively high. But, for them to be just women the men number is much higher than the women. That doesn’t surprise me at all. The men are 253 per 100,00 verse women is only 47 per 100,000. That’s expected though because though women have the capability to commit crimes, men still tower over them in the rates because it’s almost as if they are more driven to commit crime than women are, especially at such young ages where they are influenced by their parents or society. Maybe their friend’s parents are criminals or their own parents are criminals and that has a major influence over their decisions. Thankfully, though, it looks like the Illinois female juvenile rate isn’t nearly as high as some places like South Dakota, Wyoming or Nebraska. That’s a bit more of a relief. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123.
Waiver-
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article and seeing that some juveniles may be waived to criminal court is odd. I know only one percent of juvenile cases get waived, and some of those cases may need to be waived, but if we do not treat them or send them to maybe a rehab center at an early age then they will never learn from their mistakes. If we just send them to criminal court and they get locked up for twenty years then what are they going to do when they get out of prison. Seeing that the peak for juveniles getting waived to criminal court was in the 90’s probably mainly resulted from our government trying to crack down on drugs, so anyone who was caught with drugs should have to pay the penalty no matter what age. I can see waiving juveniles to criminal court if they murdered or raped someone, but if we send them to criminal court for drug offenses, then most of the time if they get convicted and sentenced they will not have the resources to get any help or to get a good education. With the waiver, I feel like it was good that is there to help the youth. It allows the youth to get another chance if the crime that they did was not really that bad. I do feel like sometimes it shouldn’t be allowed because at the end of the day the youth know what they are doing if they commit a crime. It's a choice that they make. I think it is very much hard to get a waiver passed on the youth. I was really shocked about how for every 1,000 cases only 4 of the cases get waived. That isn’t even half for such a substantial number. It is also good that the numbers decrease over the years. Why is it that the drug offenses peaked the highest? That was weird. Drug offenses are the number one that are being waived the most, in 2008. I found it odd that in 1994, when the rates skyrocketed, it wasn’t necessarily for white youth, but for African American youth instead. The statistics stated that the judicial waiver for drug offense cases involving black youth was three times the likelihood of white youth. However, in 2011, person, drug and public order offense cases were slightly more likely to be judicially waived than those involving white youth, which seems a lot like 1994. I wonder, though, what it would look like if one were to combine the statistics of the genders waived and the races waived. What would become of an African American man in a drug offense in comparison to a white man on the same offense or even a white or black female even. I think a very important aspect of the statistics is the attention to the rates of genders in comparison to each other as well as the races. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
Female Demographics
ReplyDeleteLooking at the female residential placement demographics I was pretty surprised by the frequencies in each of the states. In total, accounting for all races/ethnicities it is represented that Wyoming, South Dakota, and Nebraska had the most females in the U.S. This was surprising to me because these are not very talked about states. I would think states such as California or possibly Texas would have greater numbers. Areas in which crimes are more prevalent because that would mean that treatment would be necessary in order to fix the issue. However, looking at the total numbers, California and Texas were on the lower side of numbers compared to those main three I mentioned earlier. Comparing Wyoming and California, Wyoming with 197 (per 100,000 female juveniles) and California being 59. Residential placement should be something given to every juvenile that has been convicted or has committed a crime. I believe this to be true because treatment is what juveniles need in order to become a better person and strive from their mistakes. By looking at the different race/ethnicities given on the website I was fascinated with the results I saw. The blue colors represented a much higher number than the color green. When I clicked on the demographics for White, I noticed a lot of the states were blue. On the other hand, when I clicked on the demographics for Black I found a lot greener states overall. The demographic that had the least amount of females in residential placement was Asian. Reading the text below the map stated the more males were placed in residential than females. This statement surprised me, but I do understand that there are more males committing more serious offenses. From an article provided on the ojjdp website, residential placement was more for juveniles who have committed more serious crimes. I noticed that I could look at the different years of the female placement statistics. In 2013 there were a lot more females in total being placed in residential than in the most current year listed being 2015. I found these numbers interesting because I would think that over more time, it would be more prevalent to keep juveniles in residential placement. Even though it is for hold juveniles awaiting the system, I believe that juveniles would benefit them greatly in the long run. Being brought into a place to get behavioral, emotional, and just overall treatment could help get these juveniles back on the right track. Looking at the text only version it was easier to see how different the numbers were across the U.S. For the U.S. total white was third in the overall total with minority and black being at the top. This makes me curious to compare the numbers for male residential placement with race/ethnicity in order to make more comparisons between them. I found this information to be extremely informative and interesting to see how different each state demographics play out. Sunshine123 & UofM123
Victims-
ReplyDeleteReading that more than sixty percent of children had been exposed to some sort of violence within the last year is terrible. What are we teaching our children or what are they going to learn from us is we cannot protect them from seeing this type of stuff and trying to emulate it. Now I know that we cannot stop everything that our kids may see, but we do need to start limiting some of the things that they may see. I feel that most of the violence that children may see if most likely on television or if they live in poverty stricken areas, there may be gangs around and they may not be able to get away from seeing all that stuff. When reading that almost half of the children who were surveyed had said they have been assault within a year is ridiculous. How are parents supposed to feel okay with letting their child go to the park or to a friend’s how by themselves if they may get attacked? How could kids know that their parents are looking out for them and trying to protect them if they are not around and the child gets assaulted? Children are being assaulted every minute of the day and we don't even know it. A child has been assaulted at least once in their lifetime. Even, if it is a threat from their school or home. I am a firm believer that a child should never be assaulted because it is just a child. At least 1 in 10 were injured in an assault. I think we need to keep a close eye on the children because there is no way that a child should be getting injured and assault. Especially if it is a younger child. What did that young child do to get assaulted in the first place? And, to think that every day a child is getting violently assaulted from a family member or just from a friend. Even to emotional abuse. 1 in 10 suffer from emotional abuse. That is so disgusting that you would even attempt to put down a young child. I found it disgusting that the statistics stated that children see more violence and crime than adults do. And it’s not just seen in public places like schools or communities but in their own homes as well. It’s no shocker than children exposed to these violent tendancies end up resulting to giving into the pressure of committing crimes themselves or even doing drugs. According to this report, research has shown that children that are given an intervention after being exposed to crime are more likely to be saved or rehabilitated than kids that are left alone to think and figure out everything for themselves. They usually don’t figure it out in time to keep themselves out of prison. After all, the bar graph on the next page shows that sixty percent of children have exposure to crime or violence, and guarantee if they are on the statistics, they got arrested at some point. SomethingProfound123, ws123, illini123
Victims
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the message from the OJJDP they made it very clear that children are more likely to become a victim then a adult. Whether it be at school, home, or in their neighborhood. These exposures to violence can leave a kid traumatized even if the incident wasn't that serious. Being bullied or abused at home can make a kid do the same in return. If a child is exposed to violence at an early age the OJJDP says that they are more likely to be a violent adult in the future. The National Survey of Children's Exposure to Violence is the most comprehensive effort out right now that measures kids exposure to violence so that it can be more understood so that it can be stopped. The statistics of children that have been exposed to violence or were a victim themselves is startling to say the least. More than one third of the kids in the stud experienced 2 or more direct victimizations in the previous year and more than one and ten experiences 5 or more direct victimizations in the past year. Children that are exposed to violence undergo lasting physical and mental harm. Anxiety and depression are a major side effect after going through some of these heckteck situations that these kids have no control over. The amount of people with anxiety and depression shows that the everlasting effects are changing society for the worst. With anxiety and depression becoming a bigger concern so is prescriptions drugs that are given to these kids to numb the pain from past experiences. The problem is alot bigger then just kids getting bullied at school or kids seeing their parents fight, It is a problem that will follow them to throughout their lives and affect more people than just themselves. When it comes to preventing these things it has shown that identification, intervention, and continued follow up are all valuable strategies to prevent the impact of exposure to violence. By simply giving these children someone to talk to about the things they have witnessed is a great start in relieving some of the pain.
The types of trauma that children all across the U.S are facing are physical assault, bullying, sexual victimization, child maltreatment, and being a witness to violence. Nearly 47% of the children involved in the survey were physically assaulted in the past year. To me that is insane, in general boys are more likely to become victims of physical assault. When it comes to bullying it is no surprise that 22% of kids have been physically bullied in their lifetime. The victimization that does the most harm on children would have to be the sexual victimization, 1 out of every 10 children in the survey said that they have been sexually victimized in their lifetime. Which leaves a huge scare in a kids pride and self dignity that can not be fixed easily. It usually leads to counseling and self medication that is definitely not healthy when the self medications is usually a form of drug or alcohol. These victimizations of children are leading to bigger problems in society and I believe that the way they are going about it is great. KLICK123, gh_blackhawks123
Waivers
ReplyDeleteAll states have established an upper age of original jurisdiction for juvenile court. However states also have various laws that allow a child to be tried as an adult.Some states also have a legal provision which allows the prosecutor to file a juvenile case in both juvenile and adult court because the offense and the age of the accused meet certain criteria. Prosecutorial transfer does not have to meet the due process requirement stipulated by Kent v. U.S. Approximately 15 states currently have this provision, although this number is expected to increase in the next few years. Nearly all states have discretionary judicial waiver provisions that give the court judges the discretion to waive jurisdiction over individual juveniles to criminal court. Which in many cases is what happens. In many violent crimes the case is moves from juvenile court to criminal court where the child is tried as an adult and given a adult sentence. In my opinion i do not believe children should be tried as adults unless the crime committed is heinous. The court needs to look at the child's background fro past abuse or victimization before throwing them away for 30 years and expecting them to come out and go ingot society without any problems. Now the amount of children waived to criminal court has drastically wet down since 1994 by 60% but the problem is still real. The cases that are getting worse for juveniles are drug cases. More and more juveniles are getting stuck with drug charges that affect them for the rest of their lives. For most of these kids the drug problem begins with self medication or just a lack of modern day comatitties that kids have (electronics, possessions) if a kid feels left out at school or in his neighborhood he/ she is more likely to sell narcotics then a kids that has those things. Most kids don't start selling drugs for fun, they sell because a lack of something. Now most juvenile drug cases stay in juveniles court but the charge ,may stay on their record depending on the drug and the amount. Most of the cases waived against children were crimes against another person like armed robbery and murder.- KLICK123, gh_blackhawks123
Arrests
ReplyDeleteKeeping track of the juvenile arrests year by year is very beneficial and in the case of 2011, it should have brought a fair amount of hope to the juvenile justice system. This should have been the case because arrests in 2011 were down 11 percent from 2010 and down 31 percent since 2002, which is a tremendous improvement. An 11% decrease in just one year is very impressive, and a 31% decrease in juvenile arrests in 8-9 years is extremely impressive as well. A more specific statistic given is the fact that juvenile arrests for violent crime fell 29% in the 5 years leading up to 2011, showing a significant decrease and overall win for the juvenile justice system as a whole. As a result of this, the number of juvenile violent crime arrests in 2011 was less than any of the previous 32 years and 15% less than the previous low point in 1984. While the number of arrests in all offense categories declined for juveniles but increased in several offense categories for adults in between 2002 and 2011. Juvenile property crime also declined over the couple years leading up to 2011. Between 1994 and 2006, the number of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests was cut in half, reaching its lowest level since at least 1980. By 2011, the number of juvenile Property Crime Index arrests fell 23%, reaching its lowest level since at least 1980. While these property crimes decreased heavily, there was one subcategory that rose from 2010, and that was arson, which increased by 8%. From 2002-2011, female juvenile arrests declined less than juvenile males, which comes a big surprise to me, because females are usually the lesser of the two. In almost all of the categories, males juvenile arrests decreased more than that of females, and sometimes drastically so, which was true in areas such as simple assault, property crime, larceny, theft, liquor law violations, driving under the influence, and disorderly conduct. Seeing this data goes to show that female juvenile crime is an issue that would need more attention after coming across information such as this. This will most likely not be the case every year, but the numbers being so far apart in comparison is a red flag and should be investigated at further length to find the reason behind such behavior by female juveniles. Even though their overall numbers are most likely lower than the males, the fact that the males are decreasing at a muh greater rate is cause for concern as it pertains to the females. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
Females
ReplyDeleteGenerally speaking, I do not think that the rates of residential placement are extraordinarily high. However, there are four states in which the rates are definitely too high, and from the highest down are: Wyoming (197 per 100,000), West Virginia (175 per 100,000), South Dakota (138 per 100,000) and Nebraska (137 per 100,000). These statistics are representative of all races and ethnicities combined, without any comparison between one or the other. The states listed above clearly need to look into their issue of female crime because they are significantly higher than all of the other states throughout the country. The state that is closest to the numbers that these four states are pushing is North Dakota, and they are nowhere near the high numbers of Wyoming, West Virginia, South Dakota, and Nebraska. North Dakota only has 87 per 100,000, which goes to show just how high those four states really are. In the highest leading state of Wyoming, there were 168 white females in residential placement per 100,000 while there were 315 minority women in residential placement per 100,000, which is by no means a slight difference. This is a major find and a serious issue for not just Wyoming, but a large majority of other states that show similar differences between the two groups. It doesn’t seem likely to me that all minorities simply love getting into trouble while white juveniles do not. There are factors that go along with this such as socioeconomic status and education. There are groups of people from every race and ethnicity that have struggles and factors that lead to misconduct as juveniles, but some groups of people may be more affected than others, and that may be partially what we are seeing in this map. There are always triggers that lead to these juveniles lashing out, there is not a race or ethnicity that are born committing crimes. These behaviors are developed over time, and that is what we need to focus on, and as we see these number differences between races and ethnicities, we need to go after a solution accordingly so that we see improvement throughout the country in every group of people. We need to use and take advantage of the ability to obtain this kind of information to better each and every generation of juveniles. gh_blackhawks123, KLICK123
Female Placement,
ReplyDeleteThe OJJDP have gathered and analyzed statistical data on juvenile’s placement rates throughout the United States. This data shows the statistical relationship between females of many ethnicities and their state’s female residential placement rates per 100,000. The OJJDP have data on the years 1997-2015. This was a very useful tool in really getting a better understanding of the types of patterns you can see throughout the years. While I was examining the article, a few interesting connections could be made. The article points out trends within the ratios between different race or ethnicities. The article mentions that its data concluded that nationally, the ratio of minority to white females was two to one in the likelihood of being in residential placement. This pattern can be seen throughout the years and in certain states. This type of information is critical and useful to law enforcement and public organizations in locating trends and areas to improve on. This can help society and the individuals within the juvenile placement system by providing a fairer and just experience for youth in America. Public organizations could use this data to orchestrate help and aid to juveniles within the residential placement system. Furthermore, placement rates for females were significantly lower than males overall. It would be interesting to compare the different genders in relation to residential placement. Crime is not a one-sided subject, trends within either the male or female population can affect the opposite gender’s population. Overall this article really helps add the research we have been doing on juvenile arrests and how some of those cases may end up transferred to criminal court. Some extreme examples like these help us Improve and refine a system takes time and care to provide a fairer due process. Ghost123, Gymlife123