The first paper described the methodology and presented findings on three basic questions. Now additional questions will be considered. How are self-reported delinquencies distributed according to age and social class status? How did typology of schools relate to the definition of delinquency and the management of delinquents? What was the relative importance of companionate delinquency? How did the police, youth agencies, and schools interact as members of a social control network? Criminologists have pointed out that official statistics tell us more about the activities of control institutions and their criteria of decision making than of the total dimensions and qualities of delinquency. A previous paper by the authors presented the methodology and some of the findings of an investigation of self-reported delinquency in a small city in Baden-Wurttemberg, conducted by the Max Planck Institute of Foreign and International Criminal Law. Now that analysis is extended to four other topics susceptible to self-report data: What is the relationship between self-reported delinquency and age and social class status in this small city? What was the relative importance there of companionate delinquency? How did the police, youth agencies and schools in this small city interact as components of a social control system? (Publisher abstract)