skip navigation

CrimeSolutions.gov

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar

PUBLICATIONS

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
 
NCJ Number: NCJ 205001   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
Title: Effect of Juvenile Justice System Processing on Subsequent Delinquent and Criminal Behavior: A Cross-National Study
Author(s): David Huizinga ; Karl Schumann ; Beate Ehret ; Amanda Elliott
Corporate Author: University of Colorado
United States of America
Date Published: 10/2003
Page Count: 154
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Grant Number: 99-IJ-CX-0037
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF 
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study identified and explored the similarities and differences in juvenile justice systems in Denver, CO, and Bremen, Germany, in order to determine the effects of distinct features of these systems on subsequent delinquency were examined in samples of high-risk subjects at each site.
Abstract: Compared with the Denver system, the Bremen juvenile justice system has a more lenient, diversion-oriented policy; whereas, the Denver juvenile justice system was more punitive. In Bremen, arrest cannot legally occur until a person is 14-years-old, and juvenile law can be and usually is applied to individuals 18- to 20-years-old. In Denver, the age of responsibility is 10-years-old, and adult processing begins at age 18. In Bremen, dismissal and diversion from formal court processing account for over 90 percent of the cases of juveniles ages 14 to 17 referred to the prosecution. In Denver, offenders may be ticketed or taken into custody. Arrested offenders are most often referred to juvenile court and receive intermediate sanctions. Confinement is rare in Bremen, but is used in approximately 10-20 percent of Denver cases. Delinquency prevalence rates were similar at both sites (62-69 percent) for those ages 14-17; however, Denver offenders reported committing a greater number of offenses every year. The use of cross-tabulations, multinomial regression, precision-matched control groups, and event-history models found little effect of arrest on subsequent delinquency across both sites. When there was an effect, arrest was associated with sustained or increasing levels of delinquent behavior. The level of sanction applied had little impact on future delinquency and crime. In Bremen particularly, when an effect was observed more severe sanctions resulted in persistence or increases in future delinquent/criminal involvement. This report advises that although the findings must be tempered by limitations identified in this report, the consistency of multiple analyses across sites suggests the general ineffectiveness of arrest and sanctioning. The findings suggest that policymakers should examine the appropriateness of increased severity of sanctions as a crime-control strategy. Extensive tables and 66 references
Main Term(s): Juvenile Corrections/Detention effectiveness
Index Term(s): Cross cultural comparisons ; Foreign juvenile justice systems ; Juvenile justice policies ; NIJ final report ; Colorado ; Germany
Note: Dataset may be archived by the NIJ Data Resources Program at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data
   
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=205001

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.