Although components of the criminal justice system will always have various ways of responding to their tasks, analysis of the dynamics and consequences of different types of courts could improve their services. In Vienna, probation officers are somewhat separate from the courts, both courts and police have social workers, all juveniles must have legal counsel, and lay judges are used in juvenile courts. Information for this paper was derived from about 200 questionnaires completed by Viennese judges, state attorneys, male and female police officers, defense attorneys, scribes who assist judges, social workers, probation officers, youth officials, and social science scholars. In the first typology, respondents were categorized as optimists, realists, sentinals, and alarmists, depending on their opinions regarding the frequency of delinquencies among boys and the degree of danger that delinquencies posed to society. Scores on punitiveness and occupations of the respondents were then compared with the different types. Both alarmists and optimists rated high on the punitive scales. With the exception of judges, persons who were directly involved in the courtroom tended to fall into the alarmist and sentinal roles, while social workers, probation officers, and youth officials were clearly in the optimist category. In the second typology, opinions on the frequency of boys' delinquencies and the influence of mental illness were used to develop four categories: confident, or nice and healthy; cavalier, or rowdy but healthy; concerned, or nice but sick; and fearful, or rowdy and sick. Correlations with punitiveness indicated that the mental illness variable had no effect. Judges were most frequently typed as confident, along with probation officers, youth officials, and scholars. State attorneys and police put most delinquents in the cavalier category. Social workers were more likely to see delinquents as mentally ill. Using the same strategy, the third typology focused on beliefs in the usefulness of intervention by asking respondents how many boys who commit delinquent acts should come before the court and developed the classifications of antimeddler, defeatist, hopeful helper, and eager helper. Approximately half of the first three types scored high on punitiveness. The police and those involved directly in court processes tended to be in the hopeful helper category, while probation officers, youth officials, and scholars were antimeddler, believing that courts did little to deter delinquency. Additional analyses found differences between male and female attitudes, no disparities related to age, and differences based on political commitment rather than philosophy. Footnotes and a bibliography of 24 references are included.