Recently, much has been written about a Pew report that found Texas had a suspension rate of sixty percent for public secondary school students (see Reentry Central article “Report on Texas School System Shows Sixty Percent Suspension Rate,” July 26, 2011). Many of the suspended students ended up in the juvenile justice system. Certain states, including Connecticut, have now enacted laws that mandate a review of incidents that happen in a school to ascertain if the incident can be handled without the intervention of the juvenile criminal justice system.
Today the juvenile justice system is known by several different names, including Teen Court, Youth Court, Youth Peer Court, and Youth Justice Programs. The goal of each court or program is to provide a “fair and restorative sentence or disposition for the youth respondent.” according to Scott Peterson, the executive director of Global Youth Justice (GYJ). According to Global Youth Justice, there are several different types of Youth Justice Programs that take place in juvenile courts, juvenile probation departments, law enforcement, private nonprofit organizations, and schools.
GYJ found that:
Approximately 42% of youth justice programs in operation are juvenile justice system-based programs.
Approximately 22% of youth justice programs are community-based and are incorporated as, or operated by, private nonprofit organizations.
Approximately 36% of youth justice programs are school-based.
GYJ offers that there are four main youth justice models, although each model may include several variations.
The Adult Judge Model is used in 53% of youth justice programs.
The Youth Judge Model is used 18% of the time.
The Peer Jury Model is used 31% of the time.
The Youth Tribunal Model is used 10% of the time.
Not all cases will be heard in a Youth Justice Program. Serious charges will be referred elsewhere, while those accused of theft, drug possession, truancy, and other crimes not of a serious nature may be accepted for a youth justice program.
In most instances, participation in a youth justice program requires something other than just being charged with a “minor” crime. According to GYJ, 93% of youth justice programs decree that a participant must plead guilty before being accepted into the youth justice program. Only 7% of the youth justice programs allow a a juvenile to enter a plea of not guilty. In those programs, a hearing is held to determine the innocence or guilt of a defendant, and if a determination of guilt is made, the program offers an appropriate sentence. Since many offenses occur in school, as the Texas study found, thirty-six percent of all youth justice programs are school- based.
Statistics that GYJ obtained from the U.S. government show that the majority of those found guilty in a youth justice program are sentenced to community service, educational workshops, having to write an essay, or apologizing to their victim. Other sentences may include counseling, peer mediation, or taking a victim awareness class. Mandated jury duty in other victim justice programs is required in 53% of all cases.
The old system when young offenders were arrested, often held in a detention center until their cases came before a judge, and then sent to a juvenile “correctional” facility, if convicted, is becoming a thing of the past. Youth justice programs try to find alternatives for young people convicted of non-serious crimes. The alternatives are more cost-effective, provide the young offenders with more intelligent sentences, and allow them to remain in school. As an added bonus, according to GYJ, 63% of participants in a youth justice program who successfully complete their requirements have their charges dismissed, while another 27% have their records expunged immediately.
|
