CJ 404 Exam 2

Factors to keep in mind

1. Gangs serve as a proxy for "the other" (us v them) -Targets of punitive criminal justice policies, especially minorities perceived as threats to wider society 2. Societal view has changed from seeing gang members as "delinquents", to now as "hardened criminals" 3. Mass incarceration has emerged as the main solution 4. Media plays a key role in "demonizing" gang members -Moral panics about "increased" gang violence, true or not? 5. Gang-involved juveniles are routinely prosecuted as adults 6. Concerns about gang violence lead to search for "magic bullet" programs to cure gang problems -GREAT, Operation Ceasefire

10 Key Components of Drug Courts

1. Integrate treatment with criminal justice processing 2. Use a non-adversarial approach 3. Identify participants early 4. Provide continuum of treatment services 5. Monitor abstinence with drug testing 6. Graduated sanctions and rewards 7. Ongoing judicial interaction ^^^^ day to day activities vvvv additional to help it run 8. Monitor/evaluate program goals 9. Continuing education for personnel 10. Forging community partnerships •Must include all of these to be a drug court

3 Possible Causes of "Pauperism"

1. Morally weak, criminal parents 2. Temptations of the streets 3. Weaknesses of the child's moral nature (born inferior to others) •Interventions focused on changing 1 and 3, but little effort to improve community •Many of the kids were recent European immigrants, catholics -Different from Protestant, majority english-ancestry "city fathers" •The house of refuge was soon full (within 3 years) •"Placing out" process began instead -Remove kids from cities, send them out to western states (OH and IN) -Worked on farms until 21 years old -50,000 kids removed from NYC alone, many not delinquent •These interventions fit the idea of JD as "Paupers" who need to be taught to be hardworking

3 Possible Myths about Juvenile Delinquency

1. Myth of Progress: There was more JD in the past than today 2. "Myth that nothing changes": JD was the same in the past as it is now 3. "Myth of the good old days": There was less JD in the past than today •People tend to believe in the good old days: "Less JD when I was a kid" -What's the impact on policy, if people think this (do what we used to do?) •Some things have changed over time, others have stayed the same -Things that have not changed probably can't be changed -Thinks that have changed probably can be changed •The cycle of juvenile justice policies happens because people repeat the past, not learn from it •people often can't see the context they live in (what's the actual JD rate now?) -Like a fish can't see the water it swims in

The Cyclical Pattern in Juvenile Justice Policy

1. Perception that juvenile crime is high -Punishment is blamed; either too harsh or too lenient 2. Lead to a forced choice (policy swings to opposite direction) 3. Reform is sought (but often just recycled old ideas) 4. Continue to perceive that juvenile crime is high -Lenient punishments are the problem 5. Calls to "get tough" on juvenile crime -So now, there are many harsh, but few lenient punishments 6. Perception of high juvenile crime remains, cycle begins again at #1

Different Waiver Types

1. Statutory Exclusion -Law applies to specific age/crime combinations --Certain ages and certain offenses are automatically waived to adult court --IA: Drug, violence, weapon charges by 16+ year olds are automatically waived to adult courts 2. "Once waived, always waived" -All subsequent charges, regardless of offense severity have to be charged in adult criminal court; in IA, if waived 16+ years old, always waived 3. Judicial Waiver -Judge's discretion which juveniles to waive, after a hearing 4. Direct File (Prosecutorial Waiver) -Prosecutor can file juvenile case directly to the adult court, prior to any appearance before the judge

Estimated Costs of White Collar Crimes

•Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (2016) -Studied 2410 cases of WCC (49% from the USA) --Total direct losses were $6.3 Billiom •FBI (2016) estimated losses were more than $300 Billion •Cohen (2016): "The Costs of White Collar Crime" -"Occupational theft and employee fraud" cost $800 Billion in the U.S. alone --Doesn't include costs for insurance fraud, piracy, ID theft, etc --Total another $800 Billion roughly -Comparable to the estimate of $833 for all street crimes

Cooper (1994): Expedited Drug Case Management

•1980's: Growing number of drug cases in courts -Courts re-examined methods for handling them --Many cases included... ---Possession of small amounts of drugs ---Time consuming pre-trial motions, drug analysis ---Need for immediate supervision/treatment -Typical changes involved... --Special drug divisions in regular crime courts --Expedited processing of drug cases --Deferred prosecution with supervised drug treatment --Increased coordination of court and treatment •Courts needed to quickly identify: -Cases amenable to treatment from those not, and... -Cases that can be handled quickly by the criminal justice system -Many other courts were starting to coordinate other agency's efforts (treatment) •1989: Bureau of Justice Assistance started Demonstration Programs to help states -Middlesex, NJ; Portland, OR; Philadelphia, PA -Developed "Differentiated Case Management" programs

What About Criminals and the System?

•3 million index-arrests per year -The Criminal Justice System Funnel --Start with large number of crimes, cases drop out at each stage (arrest, prosecution, conviction) •Chance and length of prison sentence have increased since the 1970's •Influences on prosecution decision -Seriousness of crime -Publicity of the case -Sufficiency of evidence/witnesses -Victim/offender relationship

The Current State of Immigration and the Law: Federal Policies

•9/11 and the War on Terror -The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) --Created Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) ---Successor to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) -The National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) --Required adult men from 24 predominately Muslim countries to register their names and fingerprints with the government (and North Korea) --80,000 men were registered (non convicted of a crime) --Over 5,000 men were detained --Discontinued in 2011, repealed in 2016 •The Secure Border Initiative (SBI) of 2005 -Plan to secure American borders, decrease unauthorized migration --Two phases: 1. Expand personnel and technology on the border 2. Focused on immigration enforcement in the interior ---Did this by limiting illegal employment, causing workplace raids to increase 1200% •The National Fugitive Operations Program (NFOP) -Created to locate and deport fugitive aliens -Program funding increased from $9 million to $218 million, and a 1300% increase in personnel (2003-2009) -Over people 40,000 had been arrested -Over 1.1 million people had been deported •The U.S.A. PATRIOT Act -Extended some earlier historical legislation: --Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 ---Authorized Attorney General to detain non-citizens while they await deportation hearings (some for just civil offenses) --Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 ---Expanded the number of offenses that allowed legal permanent resident to be deportation eligible ---Made it so several different groups of immigrants are subject to detention without bond review (public safety, risk of flight, etc) --Immigrant detention has increased; 30,000 immigrants in detention on a daily basis --Cost of detention: $150 per person, per day ($54,000 per year) --Community alternatives are cheaper, have high compliance rates

Other Influences on Decisions

•<1% dropped from exclusionary rule -No "probable cause" to obtain evidence •Differences in Police Officer Effectiveness -Some present stronger cases to prosecutor •Sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimums... -Shifted discretion from judges to prosecutors --Shifted from plea-bargaining to charge-bargaining -Consequences of this for due process? --Less judicial review of the "bargains", more hidden process •What about effect on workload on decisions? -Perception of backlog, but not actual backlog is related to prosecutor's decision-making

Domestic Violence

•A pattern of behavior in which one person attempts to gain power and control over another person -Legal definitions vary, can include the following acts, depending on the jurisdiction: --Battery, sexual assault, kidnapping or unlawful imprisonment, criminal harassment, stalking, and intimidation -Researchers and advocates often use less restrictive definitions: --Include threats, isolation, denial, blame, emotional abuse, and economic abuse, because these are related to acts of violence •"Domestic Violence" can include: -Child abuse, parent abuse, and elder abuse

Immigration and the Law: Immigration Acts of the 1800's

•Alien and Sedition Act of 1798 -Targeted immigrants, allowed surveillance, deportation --Also banned "false, scandalous and malicious writing" against Congress or the president, called Democratic-Republicans (other political party) traitors ---Against 1st amendment --Said it was illegal to conspire "to oppose any measure or measures of the government •Anti-Alien Contract Labor Law of 1885 -Made it illegal to hire a worker with a prearranged contract •Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 -Prohibited immigration of Chinese workers and banned foreign born Chinese residents from being U.S. citizens •Geary Act of 1892 -Extended Chinese Exclusion Act, until it was repealed in 1943

Mandatory Arrest Pro and Cons

•Argument for... -IPV affets society as a whole; responsibility of maintaining public order and safety -Mandating arrest protects victim -Abusers are held accountable, and arresting them sends the message that IPV will not be tolerated --It makes it clear that IP is as serious as other forms of assaults •Arguments against... -Assumes arrest is always beneficial to the victim -Victims will be afraid to contact police, because they don't want arrest -Arrest cna escalate violence -Can disempower victims, and remove their autonomy/control --Reinforces idea that victims cannot make rational choices

The Current State of the Policy

•As of 2000, 22 states have mandatory arrest laws... -6 states have pro-arrest laws -22 states have discretionary arrest laws •States all vary in their implementation of the polciies -Differences among states for what IPV incidents must or should result in arrest --Type of assault (e.g., felony, injury, etc) --Time period after assault (e.g., past 4 hours, 24 hours, etc) --Relationship between victim and offender •The most important variations -Victim-Offender relationships --As of 2000, 15 of the 22 states with mandatory arrest laws exclude dating relationships; so Mandatory Arrest not required ---IA, SC, SD, OH,VA, MO, KA, and 8 other states -Same-sex partners --Some states exclude same-sex partners from criminal prosecution for domestic violence (DE, MT, SC exclude these cases) •Protection (Restraining) Orders -Prohibit contact between a victim and offender --Violation leads to arrest in 33 states, including IA, KS, MO, MN, NE, ND -VAWA created Full Faith and Credit provision for protection orders --Orders are enforced in every state, regardless of where it originated •Primary Aggressor Statutes -Require police to determine and arrest the aggressor (can be difficult) -Factors that help determine who the aggressor is: -Severity of injuries and whether they are offensive or defensive -History of IPV in the relationship -Likelihood of future injuries

How Do We Fix It? Suggestions for Gang Policy Reform

•Attention to detail -Understand the causes of delinquency and gang involvement --Extent of violence in boys' and girls' own lives --Not all cities have gang problems, even though many factors are the same... role of opportunity (gang culture self-perpetuating?) -Avoid the moral panic response -Continue to work for social structural changes --Alternatives to engaging in crime, joining a gang for juveniles -Decriminalize Marijuana --Undercut cartels' profits, reduce prison populations -Study history to know what works and doesn't

The Next Step in Juvenile Justice

•By 1819, the old system (HOR and Placing Out) was gone -Public still liked the idea of reforming these juveniles, but needed a new process --O'Connell case was blamed for breaking the system, but it had not really been working in the first place •By 1899, the 1st Juvenile Court was developed (Chicago) as an alternative process -New court had broad jurisdiction over juveniles (delinquency, neglect, abuse, etc.) --Laws passed to keep juveniles from adult courts, unless over 17 -Softened language from adult court, not "conviction", but "adjudication" --But still no "Due Process" protections, because... --The stated goal was rehabilitation, social services, and not punishment •Chicago at the time had many recent immigrants -Prevailing social view then was that these groups were "biologically inferior" --Some people had applied Darwin's Theory of Evolutionary Selection to immigrants --The court was seen as a way to control (and help) these groups ---Kids were viewed as "in need" (like the view as Paupers, they were not raised properly)

What Do We Know About Prosecutors?

•Can be elected or appointed •Must handle large volumes of cases •Must decide which cases to pursue •Have wide, un-reviewed discretion -Prosecutors serve the local community -Represent local community values -So, courts have been "hands-off" --Defer to individual judgement mostly

Plea Bargaining

•Case selection -Do you take only the "winnable" cases? -Or prosecute to pressure for a bargain? •More bargains = more convictions -But less incarcerations, why? --Offer probation as incentive, for instance •Does plea bargaining violate defendant's rights? Trial by jury of peers •Does it reduce deterrence? -More penalties (certainty), but less severity

The Back Story

•Changes from 1820's to 1900 -Cities begin to grow; Urbanization, Immigration, Industrialization --Negative influences of the city, un-supervised kids, poor parenting -Ideas about children change; had been ignored or seen as little adults --Children were now seen as different from adults because: ---They were vulnerable and needed protection ---They were innocent and immature (no "mens rea") ---They were emotionally priceless (lived longer now) -Solution at the time was to change the society (social work) --Or, remove the child from the negative environment (city) •Early attempts were the "house of refuge" and the "placing out" system -Overburdened, so 1st Juvenile Court was developed in 1899 (Illinois) --Delinquents are "Children in Need of Supervision" (CHINS) --Broad jurisdiction over kids ("parens patriae"), but no due process ---Focus was on treatment/social services, not punishment ---Part of Progressive Era reforms (tackle social problems) •Development of the first Juvenile Court -Influenced by Old English Chancery Courts --Handle minor's inheritance, because children had no legal status until they were adults --Limit of the original "Parens Patriae" (state as parent) Doctrine •Three procedural features of the 1st Juvenile Court in Illinois 1. Confidentiality (sealed records, to avoid labeling) 2. Informality (goal is to help, not punish) 3. Non-Adversarial (cooperate for the good of the children) •Jurisdiction over multiple types of cases -Status offenses (age-related offenses; Truancy, Under-age drinking) -Delinquency (crimes if done by an adult) -Dependency (neglect of the child) •Crime had begun increasing in the 1960's -By 1970s and 1980's, juvenile court was criticized as "too soft on crime" --Existing adult and juvenile systems were blamed for failures --Critics wanted punishment/deterrence, no rehabilitation ---In corrections, the belief was "Nothing works" ----Similar to "Crisis of Effectiveness" in policing -In 1990's, many "Get Tough" statutes were enacted --Made it easier for judges/prosecutors to waive youth to adult court ---So they could be dealt with as "hardened criminals" (deterred) ---"old enough to do the crime, old enough to do the crime" ----In Houston, the population increased 65% from 1980-2010 (2.5-4.1 million) ----But, the number of waived juvenile cases increased almost 300% (1200 per year to 3400 per year)

Consequences of White-Collar and Corporate Crimes Cont.

•Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) -Nonprofit "watchdog" group -Publishes the CREW report on abuses --Example: Texas U.S. Representative Ron Paul paid salaries and fees totaling $300,000 from money contributed to his campaign ---Some funds went to family members --The report also found the following ---82 congressional members paid family members through their congressional offices, campaign committees and political action committees ---38 members earmarked in appropriation bills, funds to family business, employers and nonprofit organizations

The Backstory: Historical Perspectives on Restorative Justice

•Community Justice -Karp and Clear (2000, 2001): --"Crime prevention and justice activities that explicitly include the community in their processes and set the enhancement of community quality of life as a goal" -Formal programs began in the 1980's and have expanded -Examples of Community justice programs: --Community policing, drug courts, citizen patrols/neighborhood watches, community services requirements, halfway houses, etc. -Impact of social movements (Victims Rights, Civil Rights) too --Recognized the need to empower communities --Mediation centers were created (informal resolutions) •Victims' Rights Movement -Reforms that were achieved --Victim's right to information from prosecutors about their case --Consideration of the impact of the crime at the sentencing phase ---e.g., victim impact statements at sentencing phase --Opportunity to be heard during proceedings involving the offender --Opportunity to receive reparations/restitution ---Restore the harm, repay the losses --Receipt of direct services to address victim's needs --Prevention from further harm •Native American, First Nations, and Village-based cultures -Sentencing/peacemaking circles, focus on the community •Faith-based influences -Mennonite central committee: Important in creation of the victim-offender reconciliation program (VORP); mediation •Common Themes in restorative justice programming -Recognition of the failures of formal process --Harms done to the community by the traditional criminal justice system (incarceration) ---Little focus on harm repair, mostly about penalties -Desire for more humane system, reflecting a holistic approach --Improves community life, rather than disrupt it

What Research Has Taught Us: Outcomes Associated With Less Punitive Drug Policies

•Countries that have adopted less restrictive drug policies: -The Netherlands --De facto legalization for Marijuana and Harm Reduction approaches ---Use rates are lower than the rates in the U.S. -Portugal --Decriminalized all drugs used for personal use --Treatment and prevention methods are the primary focus ---Dug use has decreased, treatment admissions increased -Canada --Numerous Harm Reduction approaches ---Has increased the number of individuals in treatment programs

Outcomes of EDCM

•Court: More efficient, better control of caseload -More productive judges, prosecutors, public defense -Fewer defendants failing to appear -Fewer bench warrants issued •Treatment Services (some offered): More effective -Individualized case plans (sanctions and treatments) -Improved communication and coordination of services -Ensured timely/effective treatment interventions •Corrections: Reductions in costs -Fewer pretrial jail days -Lower costs for pretrial detention •programs were really early versions of drug courts

Principles of Restorative Justice

•Crime Injures the Victim and the wider community -Offenders incur an obligation to fix it -All parties should be part of the response --Crime control needs community involvement -Everyone has dignity and worth --Must respect all parties --Due process and protection of everyone's rights -Victim's perspective is crucial •Restoration is the goal -Results measured by the amount of hard repaired, not the penalty imposed •Deterrence, rehabilitation, incapacitation and retribution all focus on the offender

Heumann: Adapting to Plea Bargaining

•Expectations v Reality of young prosecutors -Little law school preparation for plea deals -Expect to do trials (Moot Court training) •The "Courtroom Workgroup" -Concept of "Negotiated Justice" (informal) •Factual Guilt is assumed -Must somehow demonstrate Legal Guilt --Most cases have very little to argue about (evidence) --So try to avoid trial and use plea bargain to get to determination of Legal Guilt

The Current State of the Policy

•Criticism of the retributive justice model -Victims are still generally ignored --Except in the most serious crimes -Prison sentences and incarceration rates have increased --Even as crime rates had already started to decline -High levels of recidivism --Up to 80% return to prison within 3 years by some counts -State and federal expenditures total $62 million --But without much to show for it •Restorative Justice practices and programs have expanded in the U.S. and worldwide, but... -They have relatively small impact on the overall justice system -Tend to be perceived as "too soft on crime" or bad for victims --But, victims report high levels of satisfaction with the programs ---Fair, shows concern for them, flexible, allows them participation •Difference between RJ and Due Process Model -RJ models: Offenders must take responsibility for their actions --Actually work to repair harms -Due Process model: Offenders generally deny responsibility --Serve some kind of sentence that may not help the victim •Main types of restorative justice programming 1. Victim-Offender Mediation (VOM) -Involve direct dialogue between victim and offender 2. Family Group Conferencing (FGC) -Meeting of victim, offender, families, communities, and government •These first 2 models are the most used and studied 3. Community Reparative Boards -Used statewide in Vermont -Board oversees offender in community, reports to court 4. Peacemaking circles -A talk-out process, similar to FG conferences, inspired by Native peoples

What is a Moral Panic?

•Definition: Intense public response to threat to societal values/interests, often leads to calls for quick actions •Problem with using this as a basis for policy-making -Seems like a new problem ("this just started") --So we often don't look at the long-standing, complex causes -Public wants an immediate solution --So politicians look for a quick fix, not necessarily one that works --"If we just go back to what we used to do..." -Can also take out attention away from other important issues

How Do We Fix It?

•Despite higher social costs than street crime, WCC gets less attention/public outcry •Recommendations include: -New legislation --Tighter regulations, oversight --More certain and severe penalties --Tighter scrutiny of congressional earmarks --Restrictions on corporate campaign contributions -Within companies, create a climate of honesty and virtue --Corporate culture influences WCC ---Lack supervision, incentive structures lead to WCC

Race, Gender, and Class Implications of Drug Policies in the United States

•Drug policies can heighten racial/ethnic, social inequalities -Racial and Ethnic minorities --7-5% of Federal and 80% of State drug prisoners -African Americans (2014: 12% reported illegal drug use) --49% of incarcerated drug offenders, 13% of the population --Hispanics (2014: 9% reported illegal drug use) ---21.6% of incarcerated drug offenders, 16% of population -Poverty --50+% incarcerated drug offenders have incomes below $10,000 -Females -29% of incarcerated women are drug offenders (19% for men)

Creation of Mandatory Arrest Policies in the U.S.

•English "Common Law" limited criminalization of IPV -Legal concept of "Coverture" -In the eyes of the law, a husband and wife are not two separate individuals, they are one entity -So, husbands can't be prosecuted for IPV •Challenges to this view of IPV -19th Century Movements (1800's) -The Temperance Movement --Viewed IPV as a symptom of alcohol abuse --Called for an individualistic solution (ban alcohol consumption) -Women's Rights Movement (Women's Suffrage era, not 1960's) --Thought IPV is a manifestation of gender inequalities in society --Called for a structural solution (reduce gender inequalities, women's oppression) •Important Court Cases -State v Rhodes (1868) --NC Supreme Court ruled that even though the assault of a wife was illegal, the defendant should not be punished because the courts should not interfere in domestic relationships (effectively decriminalized IPV) -Commonwealth v McAfee (1871) --MA Supreme Court ruled that the rights of marriage did not allow husbands to beat or strike their wives with an open hand •By 1906, 12 states and DC passed legislation making IPV against wives punishable by the whipping post •By the 1920's, most jurisdictions had developed specialized "domestic relations courts" -Individuals were encouraged to reconcile, rather than separate --Caused IPV to be viewed as a symptom of some problem between the couple

Race, Class, and Gender Implications of the Policy

•Ethnic/Racial stereotypes prevalent in US society -Courts and media help maintain stereotypes -Both male and female gang members are demonized by the media •Community Reactions to Gangs (Mays and Winfree) 1. Denial: "We don't have gangs here" 2. Overreaction: "Holy shit, they are everywhere" (moral panic) 3. Misidentification: "Every kid is a gang member" •Steps 2 and 3 can lead to police gang suppression efforts -Often focus on minority neighborhoods, where perceived threat is greatest --Research shows mixed results for these deterrence-based programs --Can also be bad for police/community relations •The History of Homicide in the US -1920's (about 9 homicides per 100,000 in population) --Increases in homicide resulted from prohibition and gang wars over bootlegged beer and alcohol -1970's (about 9 per 100,000) --Increases resulted from deindustrialization and economic recession --Also, aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement --Saw the expansion and new formation of gangs across US (1980's) -Early 1990's (about 10 per 100,000) --Increases resulted from the war over crack cocaine markets ---John Dilulio: Predicted wave of juvenile "super-predators" during 1990's. This did not occur

Suggestions for Policy Reform

•Evidence points to the need for reforms -Waivers should be used sparingly, only for the most severe cases --In Houston, 23% of waived cases were theft (mostly misdemeanor, UUV) ---16% of Marijuana possession (almost 12,000 cases) -Direct File waivers should be limited --Prosecutors have much discretion, often with little info on case/person -More focus on judicial discretion and limited waiver use --Reformed system could protect youth from consequences of waivers ---Protect the public from higher crime rates, and ---Allow juvenile court to make sensible decisions and treat youth -Collect better info on juveniles (-18 y.o.) prosecuted and punished as adults --To facilitate more research on waiver laws, and --On the implications of waiver laws by gender and class

How do we fix it? Suggestions for Immigrant Policy Reform

•Expand community-based alternatives to detention -These have high compliance levels, up to 96% -Create fewer disruptions to families •Scrutinize the role of the prison industry -Greater transparency and accountability for private sector prison corporations where many are detained --Private prison corporations spent nearly $7 million lobbying state and federal politicians •Pass comprehensive immigration reform -This is the current debate in Congress

What Stays the Same?

•Five aspects of Juvenile delinquency/juvenile justice have stayed the same for most of the last 200 years 1. Young males commit more crimes than females 2. We have special laws for juveniles 3. Juveniles are usually punished less severely (less intent, more malleable) 4. Many believe juvenile crime is worse now ("good old days") 5. Blame juvenile justice policies for perception of a current problem •And a 6th aspect is the idea that this is a new problem, not a part of a cycle (failure to learn) •Examples of Actual Changes Over Time -Juvenile (13-17) crime rates actually peaked in about 1974 (about 45% of all arrests) -From 1900-1950, the rate was only about 4.5% of all arrests (1900's were the "good old days") -Per 100,000 in the population, juveniles age 10-17 had an arrest rate of 7,500 in 1996 --In 2016, it was 2500 per 100,000 (so the 1990's were the "bad old days")

Race, Gender, and Class Implications

•Formal CJ system disproportionately impact: -Low income individuals, minorities, and women •Restorative justice could help reduce these disparities -By providing community a chance to develop the response to a crime -Divert at least some offenders from the correctional system, and -To build competency in all parties to avoid future crime --Start to address root causes of crime in a given community

Creation of Mandatory Arrest Policies in the U.S.: History of Police Response to IPV

•From Non-intervention to Arrests -1957: Oakland Police Department training manual --Arrests only worsened IPV situations -1967: International Association of Chiefs of Police training manual --The power of arrest should be exercised as a last resort •By the end of the 70's (the social justice era), you start to see change •1976: Warrantless arrest laws began to be passed •1977: The Abuse Prevention Act of 1977 -Passed by Oregon; the first mandatory arrest in the U.S. -Required officers to make an arrest •1983: 43 states had enacted the warrantless arrest policies

Mandatory and Pro-Arrest Policies' Implications

•Gender -Increase in the number of women arrested for domestic violence --In California, from 1987-2000... ---500% increase in female arrests, 135% increase in male arrests -Possible explanations for increase in female arrests... --Victim-defendants ---Victims mistakenly identified by police as abuser and arrested --Dual arrests ---Both partners commit act of violence against one another, both identified as perpetrators and arrested ----Muftic, Bouffard, and Bouffard (2007): Fargo, ND, DV Program ----Females are more likely victims than offenders (injured, called police) ----Dual arrestees less likely to recidivate than sole arrestees (9.5% v 33.3%) •Race and Ethnicity -Female minorities disproportionately impacted by mandatory arrest policies -Scott v Hart (1979): Suit claimed Black women got worse response --Oakland police agreed to respond to IPV calls more quickly, make arrests more frequently, give victims information and resources where they can seek help, and enforce court orders •Class -Low-income females more likely to be IPV victims (60% low-income v 25% avg-income) -Positive impacts of Mandatory Arrests --Can increase material resources and assistance to victims (shelters, etc) -Negative impacts of Mandatory Arrests --Diminished Material resources (lost income and supports, CPS security) •Sexuality -Same-sex IPV victims excluded from mandatory and pro-arrest laws in many jurisdictions, despite similar incidence of IPV in these couples -Victims may fear "coming out", by calling the police -More use of self-defense can mean more victim-defendants and dual arrests •Immigration Status -Undocumented immigrants face serious obstacles --Language barrier, few economic resources, social isolation, concerns over citizenship status, etc. --Victim's citizenship status may be dependent on offender -VAWA Provision for immigrant women (Federal Law) --Can self-petition for citizenship status --Allows women in deportation or removal proceedings to have their removal cancelled

Gottfredson et al (2003:) Baltimore City Drug Court Effectiveness

•Goal is to reduce addiction and crimes for money -Can be "diversionary" or "post-adjudication" -Kleiman says its too costly, testing alone is enough -Others argue treatment is crucial ingredient -Exact relation of drugs and crime is unclear, so... --We need to focus on overall changes in person... --We accomplish this with treatment services •Prior research shows less crime and drug use -Better treatment retention and cost savings, but -Many studies are not that well-conducted --They use small samples, compare graduates to drop-outs •Baltimore Drug Court Description -Felony and misdemeanor offenders from 2 courts -Includes ISP, judicial contacts, treatment, urine analysis -About 2 years long; Many heroin addicts -This drug court follows the "10 key components" •Evaluation methods -Randomly assigned offenders to drug court or not (this is rare) --Mostly went where assigned (91% got drug court as assigned) -Collected data on treatment, sanctions, urine analysis, arrests, prior offenses, demographics, time in jail -Attempts to examine impact of deterrence and treatment •Results: Groups were similar (even though randomized) -Most were heroin or cocaine addicted -Graduates took around 18 months, drop outs took around 12 months -Drug court participants got longer sentences, more time suspended (so higher threat/deterrence) --Also more days in jail, as a program sanction -Only 52% of the drug court offenders got any "certified" prescription --About 22% of the control group got any certified prescription --Little methadone maintenance (6%), despite heroin •Recidivism results: -66% of drug court participants were rearrested -81% of the control group (non-drug court) offenders were rearrested •Drug courts also had fewer re-arrests and charges -Also, fewer re-arrests for drug crimes --No difference in effectiveness by addiction severity (works for all types) •So, does getting treatment matter? -Drug court offenders with 10+ days of treatment = 57% re-arrested -Drug court offenders without any treatment = 75% re-arrested -Control group (no DC) offenders = 81% re-arrested •Drug court people got longer sentences and more sanctions -Still, drug court without treatment did not make a difference •This means that TREATMENT MATTERS -Drug courts without treatment were the same as the control group (Who got regular probation/parole)

What Research Has Taught Us

•Goals of Mandatory Arrest Policies: -Incerase proportion of cases that result in arrest -Deter future acts of abuse •Conflicting findings between the goals -Mandatory arrest policies have increased chances of arrest for IPV --33%-57% now lead to an arrest -Mandatory arrest policies can also deter victims from contacting the police --Only 17% of intimate partner rapes are reported, and... --27% of intimate partner physical assaults are reported to the police

The Current State of the Policy

•Hard to estimate the number of youth waived to adult court -Most states use age of the offender and crime type to determine which waiver mechanism can be used, but... --Don't always count cases using other than Judicial or Statutory Waivers ---So we may undercount the total number of waivers, of all types •Concerns about overuse and negative consequences of waiving: -Some states now utilize corrective procedures: -Reverse Waiver: After juvenile has been waived to adult court, they can still be waived back down to juvenile court; In IA, 14+ y.o. can petition back to juvenile court -Decertification Hearing: Judges can decide to move the case back down to the juvenile court --Consider treatment amenability, criminal history, etc.

The Fallacy of Increasing Gang Violence

•Homicide Rates -In the US, the rate is 4-8 per 100,000 people --Rate is similar to homicide rates recorded in the 1950's and in 1908 --Also lower then it was in 1920 -According to the rates, there is no gang homicide epidemic in the US --Some cities (LA, Chicago, Baltimore) have seen overall homicide increases -Recall Decker, overall homicide rate in a city is not related to the number of gangs in the city

Adapting to Plea Bargaining

•How to Prosecute Evaluate Cases 1. Serious Crime - Not Serious Crime 2. Worth Prison Time - No Prison Time •Several decisions to be made -What cases to take? -What to do with them? -What is each case worth? •Learn the local "going rate" •Role of perceived case backlog -Rather than actual backlog of cases

"Ideas Drive the Cycle, Not Reality or Facts

•Ideas or perceptions of the problems shape policy, not objective facts •Juvenile crime is high (or higher than it used to be) •Juvenile justice policies are seen as part of the problem •Think changing juvenile justice policies will reduce juvenile crime •Ideas of juvenile delinquency change over time -What causes juveniles to misbehave •Ideas of juvenile justice change over time -What the effective response should be

Unintended Consequences of the Enforcement Policies

•Immigrant neighborhoods are disproportionately targeted by law enforcement -Racial profiling is an issue -9% of Latinos nationwide reported that they were stopped and asked about their immigration status •ICE and Police actions can create "climate of fear" among citizens -Citizens are afraid to leave their homes -Trust within immigrant communities is reduced •Cross-deputization has lead to the decrease in crime reporting by Latinos

The Current State of Immigration and the Law: State and Local Initiatives

•Immigration policy and enforcement is a Federal responsibility -Failure to address outdated laws has lead states/cities to respond -This raises issues regarding Federalism: --Who has jurisdiction over federal immigration laws? -Arizona's SB1070 Law --Requires local police to check status during any legal stop ---Also increased penalties for unauthorized work and "no papers" -Arizona v United States (2012) --Many harsh provisions were overturned by the USSC: ---Including warrantless arrests, criminalization of unauthorized work, making it illegal to not carry papers

How Do We Fix It? Suggestions for Policy Reform

•Implement "Mandatory Action" policies instead of mandatory arrest policies -Police can use discretion in response, but must do something •Coordinated Community Response (CCR) -Mixed resultson deterrent effect of arrest lead to development of CCR -Comprehensive Program, to do something after the arrest: --Prosecution, sanctions, batters' treatment, advocacy for victims •Incorporate Primary Aggressors statutes -And train police in how to identify primary aggressor •Increase formal sanctions -Sends a message that IPV is a serious crime, that society takes seriously

Creation of Mandatory Arrest Policies in the U.S.: The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment Study FINDINGS

•In Minneapolise, arrests reduced recidivism -Traditional: 19% of those separated committed another crime -Psychological: 37% of those mediated committed another crime -Criminalization: 19% of those arrested committed another crime •Lead to widespread adoption of Mandatory Arrest policies... -Despite Sherman's warning that the study should be replicated in other cities; eventually it was in 5 other cities (mixed results) •Those with "Stakes in Conformity" were less likely re-arrested -Married, employed were deterred by arrest, others were not •In 1994, Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was passed -Allocates federal funds to state, local and Indian tribal governments to help stop violence against women

Rosecrance: Maintaining the Myth of Individualized Justice

•Interviewed CA Probation Officers -In 2 counties (1984-1985) -75% of those writing PSIs in the counties --PSI = Pre Sentence Investigation ---Supposed to be used to individualize the sentence for offender •Results -POs wrote recommendations to match judges' wishes (they had learned the "going rate") -Used factors judges wanted, to reach conclusion --Criminal history and current offense •Benefits to the PO of playing along -Establish credibility now, then can argue for special cases later if they want •Thorough assessments not done -Recommended sentences are standard --Either probation or prison time •Examples of Typical Cases: 1. A deal and diversion 2. Some jail with probation 3. Prison time •Often ignore social history -Education, work history, community connections -Focus only on legally-relevant facts --Prototypical cases to match the "going rate"

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)

•Intimate Partner Violence -Specific form of "Domestic Violence" •Occurs between current or former dating, cohabitating, and married partners •IPV rates in the U.S. -6.9 million women and 5.3 million men are victims each year -36% of women and 29% of men will be victims of IPV in their lifetime •Annual cost of IPV -More than $5.8 billion -Over 4$ billion per year for direct medical/mental health services costs

The First Juvenile Court (Chicago, 1899)

•Juvenile Court institutionalized the "Parens Patriae" concept -State is obligated to intervene to help kids whose parents are not •Juvenile court had broad jurisdiction over... 1. Juvenile delinquency (serious crime could still go to adult court by waiver) 2. Status offenses (age related misbehavior; smoking, truancy) 3. Neglect, abuse, abandonment (children in need of..."CHINs") •Juvenile court had nearly unlimited power, because the goal was to help -Justified by "good intentions, not actual practice (whether help was delivered) •The original "social work" model of the juvenile court -Social workers to help "fix" the community, but hard to do and admits the society is currently not working for everyone -Eventually shifts to attempts to "fix" the juvenile, not the social system

What Research Has Taught US: Outcomes of Waiver Laws

•Key goals of waiver laws: 1. Sentence serious offenders more severely -Waived youth often receive even harsher punishments than young adults charged with the same crime (judges use "typescripts") --Some mixed evidence here, with older studies showing more leniency -Waiver does seem to provide harsher punishment for juveniles 2. Judge serious juvenile offenders based on what they did -Waived youth are still judged by their immaturity --Some studies show deferred adjudications in lieu of treatment 3. To protect the public from serious juvenile offenders -Research shows no general deterrent effect -Waiver laws may increase violent crime recidivism among waived offenders (no specific deterrence) --Labeling, social learning, missed treatment opportunities worsen them •Waiver laws don't really deter juveniles. Can actually increase criminality

Race, Class, and Gender Implications of the Policy

•Like other crimes, White Collar Crimes are more likely committed by males (but high SES, white males) -Pattern is changing somewhat, as more women are graduating from universities at higher rates than males -Females outnumber males in law, medical and business schools --Will we see increasing numbers of female white collar criminals? ---Increased opportunities might explain an increase, if we do see it --Or will women behave better, even when faced with more opportunities ---Differences in motivations, might explain a lack of increase

Unintended Consequences of Juvenile Waiver Policies

•Long-term consequences of youth being transferred into the adult criminal system include: -Having a public record (leads to labeling, limited opportunities) --Having to report conviction on employment applications --Being unable to enlist in the military -Being charged as an adult on subsequent offenses -Losing the right to vote ("felon disenfranchisement") •These things are important because they can promote recidivism by interfering with re-integration, conformity •Waived juveniles are often incarcerated in adult facilities •Juveniles in adult facilities are less likely to receive Rehabilitative, educational, and counseling services -Also can be ineligible for child protective and family services alter on, too •Juveniles incarcerated in adult facilities are: -8 times more likely to commit suicide than adults -5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted -2 times more likely to be beaten by a staff member -50% more likely to be attacked by a weapon -Also report significantly higher levels of PTSD, other symptoms of mental disorders

Types of Intimate Partner Violence Arrest Policies

•Mandatory Arrest -Requires officers to make arrest, if... --There is evidence that an act of IPV has taken place, or... --Imminent threat of physical or sexual harm •Pro-Arrest -Arrest is not required, but arrest is the "preferred" outcome •Discretionary Arrest -Officers can arrest if... --Probable cause that an act of IPV has occurred --But, these discretionary policies do not require an arrest

Restorative Justice Processes

•Many types of RJ programs, but all use a "Balanced Approach" to meet three goals -All parties are involved and responsible for each of these areas 1. Accountability -Offender accepts responsibility and repairs the harm 2. Community -Responsible for the well-being of victims, and offenders 3. Competency -Offender doesn't recidivate, community can help itself

Legal Challenges to Early Interventions

•Mary Ann Crouse Case (1839) -Sent to House of Refuge, mother thought she was "unruly, unmanageable" -Father sued the state, because she had not committed a crime -Court ruled she could be kept there, because she was being helped --Lack of due process justified by stated goal of rehabilitation --"Parens Patriae" doctrine meant that the state had an obligation to "help" her --Decision based on the "good intentions", not actual practice of the system ---At this time, the houses are still in the public favor (seem like a good idea) •Daniel O' Connell Case (1898) -Again, no crime, but an "at risk" kid placed in house of refuge in Chicago --Again, parents sued state (IL), saying since there was no crime, there should be no punishment -By this time, the House of Refuge and placing out system were seen as flawed and ineffective -Court ruled on actual practice, not good intentions of system (not reforming) -Reversed the Crouse opinion. Now only felonies could be incarcerated

How Do We Fix It?: Recent Developments in U.S. Drug Policies

•Massive Government Expenditures on Drugs -2005: $467.7 billion by federal, state, local (11% of total budget) --30 times more spent on reacting than prevention, treatment, research --High costs for CJ response have lead many states to seek better options •Treatment in lieu of incarceration -California's Proposition 36 (1st/2nd non-violent drug possession) --Estimated to have saved the state of California $275 million •Sentencing reductions -Fair Sentencing Act (2010) --Crack and powder cocaine ratios were narrowed ---Now 18:1, not 100:1 --12,000 cases eligible for re-sentencing

Media and the Framing of Crime and Gangs

•Media shaped the construction and comprehension of the gang/crime problem -Why did this happen? --Media consolidation practices (few large companies) --Rise of "conservative" media and competition for public attention -Media coverage consistently over-represents extent of violent crime... "If it bleeds, it leads' --Prevalent coverage of violent crimes can lead to increased fear of African Americans and other minorities ---These groups are then linked to crime and drug use in the public eye •Media are often linked to "Moral Panics" -Often seize on sensational stories in slow news periods (summer) --Crack cocaine "epidemic" coverage was like this in the late 1980's

How Do We Fix It? Suggestions for Reform

•Models for implementing Restorative Justice -Augmentation model (currently used in the U.S.) --Parties may be referred to/choose alternative programs at various stages in contemporary CJ proceedings (Vermont reparative boards) -Safety Net Model --Opposite of the Augmentation model --Very few cases processed in traditional CJ system (NZ Juvenile Courts) -Dual Track Model --Parallel systems of RJ and traditional CJ proceedings -Unitary Model --All cases handled through RJ processes -Hybrid Model --Processes cases in one system (decide plan), and then in the other (carried out)

The Idea of Juvenile Delinquency

•Modern delinquency (behavior) first appears in 1800's America -Due to industrialization and urbanization -Emergence of JD matches timing across nations as they industrialize and urbanize •5 factors that impact development of JD in 1800's 1. Traditional responses to JD break down -Punishment options then: Family, apprenticeships, prison/workhouses or nothing 2. Urbanization and family disintegration (as both parents work in factories) -No social services to deal with new problems, there really were "good old days 3. Industrialization -More crime opportunities, more targets (goods to steal), less guardianship 4. Population growth -Increased % of juveniles in the population, and many of these kids on the streets 5. Societies develop modern JJ systems -More awareness of problem (and measurement of it for the first time)

What Research on Sex Offenders Has Taught Us

•Sex Offenders and Repeat Crimes (Recidivism) -Caveat: Most sex offenders are unknown and unstudied -Assumed to be a homogenous group (all the same) --Sex offenders have different characteristics, victim preferences, and motivations for offending ,and are only rarely mentally ill -Sex offenders are not specialists, they engage in many crime types --Property and public order offenders are more specialized -The relationship to the victim --Many victims are assaulted or abused by someone they know ---50% of victims are under 6, and 42% of victims are 6-12 years old ----But society has a perception of what a "real rape" is (so they focus on SORNA laws) -Recidivism rates are not as high as public believes they are --5.5% of released sex offenders had new sex offense (Langan and Levin, 2002) --But 22% of released "non-sex offenders" did •Impact of Laws on Known and Unknown Offenders -Mixed results for effectiveness of registration and notification laws --Some studies show that these laws increase the risk of recidivism ---Isolation, strain, stigmatization of registered offenders -Ohio Criminal Sentencing Commission Report (2006) --Listed unintended consequences of registration and notification laws ---Mislead the public into thinking the problem was solved ---Negative impacts on family members of offenders and victims ---Hindering offender reentry (e.g., residency restrictions)

Consequences of White-Collar and Corporate Crimes

•Mortgage lenders including Countrywide Financial Group -Held 1/5 US mortgages, many were made to people who could not really afford the house --Banks issued mortgages based on false income claims, inflated house appraisals, and other fraud --Mortgages were then bundled and sold to investors without disclosing the risks, that the homeowners could default the loans -Lead to the Great Recession (2007-2009), burst "Housing Bubble" --Housing prices had risen due to so much buying --The collapse also effected other types of credit (credit cards, car loans) -Government had to buy-out some troubled banks/lenders, allow others to merge --Congress eventually passes $700 Billion "Troubled Asset Relief Program" (TARP) to help stabilize financial markets •Dodd-Frank Legislation (2010) -264 rules, largest change to financial regulations since 1930's --Increased transparency required for investments (like mortgages) --Consolidated regulatory agencies ---Created the "Consumer Financial Protection Agency" ----Regulates investment products, investigated complaints, monitors financial co's (student loans, mortgages, credit cards) -----Criticized for too much regulation, stifling business, limiting choice ----Current administration wants to limit its responsibilities --Rules related to credit rating process, closing bankrupt Co's, etc ---"Stress testing" to ensure bank has assets needed if economy falters --Also specified companies of a certain size must report the ratio between CEO's compensation and median employees' earnings

Sex Offenses Committed by Youth

•Often adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court -Unless prosecutors feel the offense was serious, then can waive the juvenile to adult criminal court --15-17% of reported sex offenses are committed by youth -Research shows that youth who commit sex crimes rarely grow up to be adult sex offenders --In other areas, we tend to give juveniles a 2nd chance -Juvenile sex offenders have also been subjected to stronger restrictions due to public misconceptions --Received longer sentences than youth who commit other crimes --Subjected to registration, community notification and vicil commitment, like adults

America in the 1820s

•Only 1 generation removed from the nation's founding -Still an agricultural society, but East Coast cities were growing (industrializing) -First "myth of the good old days" starts, but it was true then -Societal problems were resolved by the "City Fathers" (civic leaders, prestigious) •Original idea of juvenile delinquents is that they are "paupers" -Unemployed, homeless people, including kids --Seen as lazy, undeserving of charity, were poor because of their vices (bad choices) --Paupers could be put in prison/workhouses at the time, to train them to be "good" --Eventually "city fathers" decided they needed a similar place for juveniles (reform them) -House of refuge created in New York City --Idea is to remove kids from the negative influences of the city itself ---Thought to be helpful (reforming them), not a punishment --No conviction needed, sent there until 21 years old --8 hours of manufacturing work, 4 hours of school

How Do We Fix It? Suggestions for Policy Reform: Sexual Offenders

•Policy improvement efforts should differentiate between types sexual offenders -Reallocate resources to focus on the high-risk sex offenders --Smaller, more focused caseloads lead to better supervision -Emphasize reforms of what happens "After punishment", so as not to appear "soft" to public -Treatment can work, too --Both "in-prison" and community-based treatment can lower recidivism risk significantly -Educate the public about the real risks/facts --Mostly known offenders, not strangers --Sexual offenders actually have low rates of recidivism

The Idea of Childhood/Adolescence

•Prior to about 1400, no concept of kids as developmentally unique -Kids were seen as little adults, or as property of the father -Didn't get as much emotional investment, child mortality was high -Kids younger than 7 were not thought capable of forming "criminal intent" •1st idea of kids as distinct was of "kids as enjoyment" (precious) •2nd idea was of kids as potential adults (they are malleable, immature) -Must be adequately shaped because they are naturally inclined to evil -They could become set as evil in adulthood, if not properly molded •Idea of adolescence emerges in 1800s -Lowe class youth (had been apprentices prior to industrialization) now had more freedom from family; less supervision, could get into more trouble -Middle class youth went to early colleges, at least partially supervised, trained to take part in society and occupational system

Restorative Justice

•RJ is an all-inclusive approach, that involves... -The victim (and supporters) -The offender (and supporters) -The community -The government •Promotes reintegration of both victims and offenders into the community -Retributive Justice (traditional) focuses on punishment --Creates an "Us v Them" view of the offender -Restorative Justice tries to keep the offender as a part of society --Why would you follow the rules if you're not part of the group"

What Research Has Taught Us About Gangs

•Recently, gangs are being reframed as "urban terrorists" -This term has oftentimes justified aggressive enforcement and denial of civil liberties -Widespread use of adult criminal court for juveniles has lead to legal challenges --Cases regarding civil liberties for juveniles: ---Roper v Simmons (2005) ----Ruled that sentencing juvenile offenders to death penalty was unconstitutional, if the offender was under 18 ---Miller v Alabama (2012) ----Ruled that a sentence of life in prison without parole for juvenile offenders was unconstitutional

What is a "Gang"?

•Researchers have many definitions of a "gang" -Generally, these definitions have 7 common elements 1. Age (pre-teens to late 20's) 2. Number (2 or more) 3. Illegal activities 4. Organization (levels vary by gang) 5. Outward identifiers (color, signs, dress) 6. Turf or territory 7. Recruitment and initiation (often violent)

The Back Story of White-Collar Crime

•Samuel Adam's Utopian idea of a public servant -Ideal public servant is motivated by altruism, not personal gain --Although educated at Harvard College, he had "neither personal ambition, nor the desire for wealth •Construction of the Transcontinental Railroad (1860's) -"Robber-Barons" (Rich Businessmen) --Bribed Congressmen to grant them funds to build railroad tracks across the continent, divert funds for personal benefit --"Oligarchs": Rich business people with high levels of political influence -"The Muckrakers" (Journalists) --Investigative writers who exposed a series of scandals ---Conditions in Chicago meat-packing plants ---Monopolies in the Oil industry •The Sherman Antitrust Act (1890) -Tried to eliminate exploitative practices that undercut the ideal of an open competitive marketplace (e.g., monopolies) --Since its passage, only 22 cases have been filed by the Department of Justice •Acts ot strengthen the Sherman Act and add new provisions -The Clayton Antitrust Act (1914) --Outlined violations, like monopolies, mergers --Remedy is civil suit, enforced by the Federal Trade Commission --The Robinson-Patman Act (1936) ---Banned price discrimination (cheaper to one seller than another) ---FTC responsible (and Department of Justice, in name only); rarely enforced •Examples of Antitrust Cases -United States v. E.C. Knight (1895) --Knight Co. owned 98% of sugar refining capacity ---U.S.S.C. ruled Knight Co. was exempt from the Sherman Act ---Had a "Monopoly of manufacturing, not commerce" -United States v Paramount Pictures (1948. 1949) --Studios were ordered to sell theaters they owned/favored -Wal-Mart Drug Stores v American Drugs (1995) --Wal-Mart accused of selling drugs below cost to hurt. competition --They won in the U.S. case but were forced to cease operations in Germany for Stifling the competition •An example of regulatory oversight -The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Thalidomide --Thalidomide was developed in the 1950's in West Germany ---Marketed for various health problems, such as morning sickness ---Drug had drastic effects; thousands of children had birth defects and deformities ---By 1960, 10,000 children in 46 countries were born deformed -But, limited use in the US, because of one FDA scientist --Frances Kelsey (MD, PhD) warned of dangers, but was pressured by US Pharmaceutical companies --Managed to limit distribution in US to 500 free samples ---Still, 17 kids were born in the US with deformities

The Current State of Business Practices Policy

•Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) -"Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act" -Requires CEO's and CFO's to certify accuracy of financial reports --This info can influence the value of the company's stock --These officials are often compensated with stocks, so they may be motivated to mis-represent company's financial situation --Penalties: Up to $5 million fine, 20 years in prison, or both -This was implemented after Enron, Worldcom, and Tyco Scandals --Arthur Anderson LLP v United States (2005) -Act created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board --Also increased financial disclosure requirements, auditor independence, and other reforms for accounting practices

The Current State of Sex Offender Policy cont.

•Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Laws Effects -Reviewed by Drake and Aos (2009) and Terry (2015) find no effects --On sexual recidivism rates, or rates of "any re-offending" -Schram and Milloy (1995): Washington State --Compared 90 sex offenders subject to SORN to 90 released before law --No differences in the % re-arrested between the two groups --But, SORN group was re-arrested more quickly (more supervision?) -Sandler, Freeman and Socia (2008): New York State --Time Series analysis: trends in crimes before and after implementation --No effect on the monthly number of arrests for "all sexual offenses" ---No effects on rapes or child molestation offenses , specifically ---No effects among 1st time offenders, or on repeat offenders ---95% of sexual offenses were by 1st time offenders (not subject to SORN) ----No apparent General Deterrence either

The Back Story on Sexual Offenders

•Since the 1920's, societal beliefs about sex offenders have remained the same -The public believes sex offenders exhibit moral degeneracy and compulsive sickness (they are mentally ill) -Sexual offender treatment programs were active in the 1960's, but the public believed they did not work --Treatments used in the 1960's likely were less effective than what is done now ---Cognitive-Behavioral Treatments are supported by substantial research ----They are more structured, hold offenders accountable for changing the factors that lead to their offending (thought patterns, etc.) •Efforts to increase awareness and Criminal Justice capacities include: -Training police officers and prosecutors to adequately respond to sex crime victims -Collecting DNA and processing the evidence (frequent backlogs) -Increasing accountability of offenders --Has not really been achieved --Conviction rates for sex-offenders have remained constant --Non-stranger assailants' sentences are shorter than stranger assailant sentences ---Fed by the perception of what is a "real" rape -Federal laws have mandated state compliance --States have to comply if they want to receive federal funds for criminal justice (maintain sex offender registries, for instance)

Immigration and the Law

•Some underlying assumption: 1. Immigrants are not loyal to the U.S.; may threaten national security (PROLLY FALSE) 2. Immigrants are inherently "criminal" because they are not authorized to be here (so assumption is that they must engage in other offenses, too) (FALSE) -Some facts from Harris County, Texas (Houston) --About 17.6% of the population are non-citizens (not necessarily "illegal") --Since 1990, the average monthly percentage of arrests who are non-citizens: 11.9% --This is 32% less likely to be arrested than would be expected, based on the percentage in the population (11.9% v 17.6%) 3. Immigrants take jobs from U.S. citizens (FALSE) -U.S. Chamber of Commerce Report (2013/2016): A conservative group --"Immigrants typically do not compete for jobs with native-born workers, and immigrants create jobs as entrepreneurs, consumers, and taxpayers" --"Immigrants do not "steal" jobs from American workers"

What Research Has Taught Us About Restorative Justice Programs

•Studies on VOM and FGC -U.S. VOM program evaluations show decreased recidivism (15%) --European programs show similar effectiveness -Also, high levels of satisfaction and perceived fairness by victims and offenders -FGC has less research, but appears promising in some cases •Gender is largely ignored in the literature -Some studies have found that programs have a greater impact on the recidivism of girls -My own study showed no effect on girls, but we had a small sample, so it could be a methodological issue •Minnesota RJ program for juveniles -Compared RJ (n=284) to traditional juvenile court (n=286) -Samples matched on age, gender, race, urban, criminal history, current offense (similar beforehand) -Results show kids in RJ program had 59% lower odds of recidivating, up to 4 years after the program •Later analyses showed the program worked best for -First time offenders and younger kids, but -Worked equally well for property or violent offenders, and across different racial groups

Cole: The Decision to Prosecute

•The "Exchange System" -Prosecutors depend on, and interact with, others --The Police ---Give them cases, but need strong evidence ---Must learn which police to trust (strong cases) ---Can return cases, refuse to prosecute --The Press ---Can use to shape public opinion --The Courts ---May respond to capacity issues, more plea bargains --Prison system ---Overcrowding may lead to slower prosecution --Judges ---Prosecutors must learn the "going rate" ----What a typical case gets for a sentence --Defense Attorneys ---Must negotiate on outcomes ----Defense attorneys generally have lower status ---Deal in volume and wants to avoid trials --The Community ---Voter's perceptions of prosecutor ----Often don't know things like conviction rate

Immigration and the Law: The 1900's

•The 1920 arrest and deportation of Communist Party members -After the Russian Revolution that overthrew the Czar •Feb. 1942: Franklin Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066 -112,00 Japanese Americans were removed and placed in confinement (Internment) camps for the duration of the war --Was done due to fears about spying, sabotage, etc, based solely on nationality •The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 -Made it illegal to hire undocumented immigrants •1994: California's Proposition 187 -Barred undocumented immigrants from receiving health care from public health clinics -Barred undocumented immigrant kids from attending schools

What Research Has Taught Us on Business Practices

•The 1980's "Saving the Loan Debacle" -White-collar crime was a key element in the disaster --Frauds were used to make the banks look financially stable -Banks had made low rate loans, but had to pay higher interest to customers, so lobbied for "Deregulation" --Dropped the requirement that an S&L have at least 400 stockholders, none of whom could own more than 25% interest --Money was lent to dummy corporations --Bank assets were hidden -Eventually the banks collapsed, owed more money than they were worth --Estimated to cost the country over $100 Billion -Similar to the "Great Recession" of 2007 (bad mortgages)

Race, Class, and Gender Implications

•Waiver policies increase racial inequality in juvenile system •Research has found that: -When charged with the same crimes, minority youth are more likely than while youth to be waived to the criminal court --In Houston, 36% of waived kids are African American (who only make up 19% of the population) -In criminal court, minority youth face more severe punishments --African American youth ---More likely to receive jail tiem than probation ---More likely to receive prison time than jail ---In Houston, 31% of White kids get a "Conditional Dismissal" ----17.5% of African American kids and 28.9% of Hispanic kids --In comparison to White youth, minority youth have a harder time gaining employment because of their criminal record

The Current State of Sex Offender Policy

•Washington's Community Protection Act (1990) -First state law: Policies for monitoring sex offenders once they re-enter the community •The Jacob Wetterling Crime Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act (1994) -First federal law to require sex offender registration systems -Mandated states to use 10% of budget to establish sex offender registration systems --Sex offenders were required to provide their residential addresses •Megan's Law (1996) -Required registration information to be publicly available --Also known as "Community Notification" -All 50 states have complied with this law •The Pam Lychnenr Sexual Offender Tracking and Identification Act (1996) -Established a national database (at FBI) to track all sex offenders convicted of an offense against a minor, or of a violent offense •The Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act (2000) -Required that registered sex offenders report their attendance or employment at any higher education institution --Information is entered into state registries -Colleges/Universities can request info from law enforcement agencies on sex offenders attending/working at their school •The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act (2006) -Designed to close some loopholes in previous laws -Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) --"Title I" requires sex offenders provide additional info ---Vehicle information ---Internet identifiers ---Must make in-person updates to their info --SORNA also requires that DNA samples of sex offenders be kept on file •Civil Commitment -Controversial response to sex offending (""Double Jeopardy"??) -Laws were originally created to treat and incapacitate mentally ill sex offenders, as an alternative to prison --Now, incarcerated sex offenders nearing the end of their sentence can be transferred to a hospital for civil commitment, after a hearing -Section 301 of the Adam Walsh Act provided grants to states to develop civil commitment programs for eligible offenders --As of 2007, 20 states and Federal Bureau of Prisons use civil commitment -Stated goal is to provide treatment to sex offenders, but most do not receive any treatment (only 20% in one CA study) -Civil commitment costs are expensive --$350 per day, or $127,750 per year (prison is about $30,000/year) •The Implicit Program Theory of "Control" Policies -Restrictive policies will result in less sexual offending ,reduced sexual recidivism and greater community awareness/safety --Research has disputed these claims •(Faulty?) Assumptions about sex offending -All sex offenders recidivate at high levels (recall 17.5% rate) -Close monitoring will reduce opportunities for new crimes -Laws prevent non-sex offenders from committing a 1st offense --General deterrence •Sex offender legislation is fueled by misconceptions about sex offending behavior -Survey of legislators found they held erroneous beliefs, got information from media coverage

The History of Drug Laws in the United States

•The 19th Century (1800's): The Laissez-Faire era -Consciousness-altering substances were openly sold -Medicine relied heavily on painkillers to treat patients --Many products contained derivatives of opium -In 1898, heroin was synthesized and soled over-the-counter •The 20th Century (1900's): National regulation begins -First Drug Law in U.S. --San Francisco city ordinance against Opium Dens (Chinese immigrants) -1920: Morphine is the most used medical drug, Alcohol the 5th -Drug addiction was common --An estimated 200,000 to 275,000 people addicted to drugs in 1915 •The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 -1st federal law that regulated drugs in the U.S. --Concerns about addiction, but also food quality --Required manufacturers to list the ingredients, and the quantity of alcohol and drugs in their products (but no bans) -Also established the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) •The Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914 -Opium and cocaine distributers must register and pay taxes -What caused the act?: --International Politics (newly acquired Philippines territory) --Racial issues also played a role in this legislation ---Cocaine portrayed as a drug that was disproportionately used by African Americans, and it incited them to violence •The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 -1st federal law banning marijuana --Based on congressional powers of taxation/interstate commerce ---Regulation of medical practice was reserved for the states -Also influenced by racial issues --Marijuana was portrayed as being disproportionately used by Mexican immigrants, and it incited them to violence --And by African American jazz musicians ("counter-culture" threat) -To possess Marijuana, you had to buy a tax stamp, but... --They made few stamps, and... --To buy a stamp, you had to have the marijuana first ---But this was illegal without a stamp (violates the 5th Amendment)

The Current State of Immigration and the Law: Federal-State Immigration Partnerships

•The 287(g) Federal-State Partnership Program -Part of Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRIRA, 1996) -Allows the federal government to shift immigration enforcement efforts to state and local law enforcement (limited number of officers "deputized" and trained) -There are 66 active agreements between federal and state governments --Most are in jails (37), not policing on the streets •Secure Communities Program -Allows local law enforcement to cross-check fingerprints of individuals booked in local jails with national databases; Operating in all 50 states •Criminal Alien Program -Court program -Helps secure "remove orders" for immigrants who are being held •Alternative Community-based Supervision Programs with High compliance rates -Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP) -Enhanced Supervision Reporting (ESR) -Electronic Monitoring (EM) Initiative •Similar to the idea of supervised pretrial release for criminal defendants •Compliance rates for these programs are 87-96% -So these generally work to make sure people show up for their hearings

Creation of Mandatory Arrest Policies in the U.S.: The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment Study

•The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (MDVE; Sherman and Berk, 1984) -Compared 3 different approaches to preventing future IPV: 1. "Traditional" approach (separation) 2. "Psychological" approach (meditation) -No special officer training or techniques involved 3. "Criminalization" approach (arrest of suspects) -Misdemeanor domestic violence cases were randomly assigned to one of these conditions

The Back Story of Gangs

•The Origins of criminology and social work -The progressive era (late 1800's) --Major societal changes ---European immigration, industrial revolution, urbanization -Jane Addams: Worked in immigrant communities --Establishing "settlement houses", focusing on literacy and job training -Gang and crime policies were crafted as community-based, youth work; aimed at long-term integration into adult life --Theories behind the community-based approach were the core founding principles of criminology ---Example: Social disorganization theory ----Boys were attracted to gangs because institutions had broken down, little societal control in certain neighborhoods •The 1950's -Policies reflected a belief in a temporary, age-limited nature of delinquency -Thomas Bernard: View most juvenile delinquents as "naive risk takers --Need to learn actions have consequences, but kids are also malleable (rehab) •The 1960's -Minority gangs become politically involved (e.g., civil rights movement) --e.g., Black Panthers, -Vice market gangs (drugs, gambling, etc.) --e.g., The Vice Lords controlled vice crimes in Chicago •The 1980's -Mass incarceration as a response to perceived increase in gang violence --Gang and turf wars over crack dealing, for instance -Prison became important in gang culture, and vice versa --Members move into and out of prison •Decker, Melde and Pyrooz: Review of Gang Research -Predictors of gang membership are not unique --Critical life events, antisocial tendencies/attitudes, delinquent peers, lack of parental supervision (these also predict general delinquency, deviance) --So, does the order, intensity, combination, or timing of these matter? --Neighborhood disadvantage may worsen individual risk factors -Average gang "career" is 2 years, but exiting differs by gang -Gangs vary in the formality of their organization, based on their focus -Gang proliferation is NOT primarily the result of migration across US -Much gang violence is expressive or retaliatory --Gangs also motivate members to non-rational behaviors (support) --No relationship between gang numbers and homicide rates in large US cities, but the numbers do predict gang homicide rate, but so does SES and density

The Current State of the Policy: Gangs

•The number of gangs is increasing -But there are a number of limitations in these estimates --Gangs don't keep membership lists, so it's based on police assessments -US estimates in 2009 (from the national gang center) --27,000 gangs (up from 21,500 in 2001); 25.6% increase --788.000 gang members (up from 731,500 in 2001) ---Only a 7% increase in the number of gang members -Estimates often fail to include female gang members --Various studies have reported different estimates of female gang members; may only be peripheral members ---Estimated 10%-40% of gang members are female ---Girls tend to join early and leave early compared to boys •Some criminal justice system gang policies -Focused on incarceration of gang members for a long period of time 1. Sentencing Enhancements -Lengthens sentence for an offender who is in a gang 2. Vertical Prosecution Programs -Assign a prosecutor to a gang member, for all crimes and for all crime --So the prosecutor is familiar with offender's history --Expectation is they will be less likely to plea bargain 3. Gang Injunctions -Civil orders bard gang members from associating with each other --Controversial: 1st amendment right to peaceably assemble •Other Types of Responses: Gang Prevention Efforts 1. 1930's: "Detached Social Workers" for worst gangs -Backfired, made these gangs worse -Need to reduce gang cohesion, not increase it 2. GREAT (Gang Resistance Education and Training) -Esbenson, et al (2001): --3500 kids in 22 schools, randomized classrooms --No effect on gang memberships or self-reported delinquency --Small improvements in attitudes toward police, gangs 3. Mentoring (like Big Brothers, Big Sisters) -Tierney, Grossman, and Resch: Random Assignment --27% less alcohol use, 45% less drug use, 52% less truancy --32% less "hitting someone"

Control V Rehabilitation

•This chapter deals with efforts to control sexual offenders -Often through registration, notification, residency restrictions •Also note that Sexual Offender treatment is effective -Losel and Schmuker (2005): In Journal of Experimental Criminology --Meta-analysis of 69 separate studies (22,000+ offenders) --Average treatment effect was 37% reduction in sexual recidivism risk ---About 6.7% of treated group and 17.5% in untreated group re-offended ---Similar reductions in risk of general (-31%) and violent re-offending (-44%) --Cognitive-Beavioral Treatment Programs and Hormonal therapy showed strongest effects -Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment Programs --Sexual offending based in deviant learning patterns --Deviant arousal (to coercion, inappropriate partners) --Must refocus thinking, cognitive distortions, emotional responses, self-control, social/coping skills, relapse prevention (avoiding triggers)

The Current State of Immigration and the Law

•U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Data -40 million immigrants in the U.S. --Estimated 11 million are undocumented immigrants (3.5% of the U.S. population) -These 40 million represent about 12.5% of the U.S. population •Immigration Offenses -Civil v Criminal distinctions are complex --Civil offenses: ---Unauthorized Presence: 180-365 days (3 year ban), unauthorized presence for 365+ days (10 year ban) ---Unauthorized Entry: (1911. 8 U.S.C. 1325 - Unlawful Entry) --Criminal Offense: ---Failure to leave, and reentry after deportation ---But if unaware of removal order, these are again civil offenses

Unintended Consequences of the U.S. Drug Policies

•Welfare eligibility -Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliations Act (1996) --Denied federal welfare benefits (lifetime) to any individual convicted of a felony drug offense; Required drug testing ---But this law does not apply to murder, rape, etc. --92,000 women have been denied welfare since 2002 ---Impacts their children, can perpetuate intergenerational transmission of poverty/crime •Public Housing eligibility -Anti-Drug Abuse Act (1988) --Public agencies required to evict tenants, if a member of the family was involved in drug-related crimes --More than 3 million people impacted •Financial Aid eligibility -Higher Education Act (1998) --Any individual applying for financial aid are required to answer questions regarding prior drug convictions --Thousands of students denied financial aid •Voter Disenfranchisement -States can disqualify individuals convicted of felony offenses from voting, for life in come states -12 states have indefinite disenfranchisement statutes --AL, AZ, DE, FL, IA, KY, MS, NE, NV, TN, VA, WY ---Require pardon, restoration application, waiting period, etc. -Each of these laws disproportionately impacted poor and minority groups

The Current State of Drug Policies in the United States

•What is "Drug Policy"? -Laws, regulations and procedures implemented by governments to deal with drug use and problems related to use -Language tends to be vague and inconsistent -Usually refers to various policies enacted at all levels of government --State, Local, Federal --Police, Courts, Corrections, Health Care System •Types of Drug Policies -Drug Criminalization ("Prohibition", most restrictive) --Production, manufacture, sale, possession, and consumption are violations of criminal statutes --Sanctions can vary depending on the following: ---Behavior (possession v manufacturing, trafficking, etc.) ---The specific substance (e.g., marijuana v crack cocaine) ---The amount of the substance (also influences the charge, as above) -De facto Legalization --The second most restrictive form of drug policy --Does not really represent any formal policy ---It is more of a procedure of not enforcing drug laws, by law enforcement (Goldstein's "Big Fish" idea, for instance) •Decriminalization ("Depenalization") -Removing criminal conduct from the jurisdiction of CJ agencies -Offense will not result in incarceration, but punished in a limited way --Usually a "civil" penalty (fine or citation; like for a traffic violation) •Drug Regulation v "Legalization" -Regulation: Access is limited (e.g., by age, or with a prescription) -Legalization: Freely available (no drugs are really in this category) --Would be the most permissive drug policy --Behaviors associated with drug use, such as drunk driving, can still be criminalized (e.g., Driving Under the influence, of marijuana) •Harm Reduction (or Harm Minimization) -Policies don't attempt total elimination of drug use/addiction --Recognize we will likely always have some drug users --Focuses on reducing harms that come from drug use ---Example: Spread of HIV/Hepatitis by sharing needles ----Needle exchange, clean needle distribution, Narcan distribution ----San Francisco: "Safe Injection Site" (minimize overdoses) -One controversial approach is Opiate Replacement therapy --Methadone Maintenance: Used for treating heroin addiction --Methadone reduces withdrawal symptoms, so person can focus on fixing underlying issues through treatment ---Then supposed to be gradually weaned off of methadone over time ---Can be effective, if used correctly (often it is not) •Author suggests that alcohol restrictions are examples of "Harm Reduction" -Policies designed to control access to alcohol --Legal age restriction --Consumption and possession regulations (open containers) --Hours of sale, zoning restrictions on alcohol sellers --Regulations on advertising of alcohol products (loosened recently for liquor ads on TV) --Regulations on the purity and potency of alcohol products --Provisions of treatment options for those who become dependent •Prohibition/Criminalization is the primary U.S. policy -Prior to 1900, drug addiction was seen as a medical issue --Coming back to this idea, in re: opioid addiction •Bureau of Justice Statistics (2011) -197,050 federal prisoners --48% of these (94,600) were for drug offenses -237,000 state prisoners serving time for drug offenses --17% of the total population of state prisoners -In 2009, 1.66 million drug arrests --Same as murder, rape, robbery, burglary, and theft combined --4:1 ration of arrests for possession v trafficking (getting big fish?) -51.6% drug arrests are for marijuana, not "hard"drugs •Specific (and Ancillary) Drug Policies -Mandatory Minimum Sentences (MMS) --Congress repealed most of these in 1979 with the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act (1979) ---They recognized that MMSs did not work --1980s: Concerns about violence related to crack cocaine use ---Federal and State governments enacted many MMS laws for drug offenses ----Legislature sets the penalty, removes discretion from judges ---As of 2012, there are 171 MMS laws in the U.S. ---100:1 for volumes of cocaine:crack that would trigger MMS ----"Fair sentencing Act of 2010": Reduced this 18:1 ---Racial disparity in enforcement: 90% African Americans at federal level -National Academy of Sciences (1993) review --MMS do not deter and are not cost-effective •Medical Marijuana Laws -1850-1942: Cannabis recognized as medicine, could be purchased in local pharmacies -1988: Francis L. Young (DEA Lawyer) advocated for removal of marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug, ignored by the DEA -Currently 23 states and D.C. allow marijuana use for medical purposes •Marijuana Legalization Measures -Ballot measures --AK, CA, CO, DC, MA, NV, OR, WA (Maine is pending) --These laws go against federal law, but the Obama administration did not focus on federal prosecutions, nor has the current administrator ---AG Sessions strongly oppose marijuana legalization or medicalization •Drug Courts -Alternative to Incarceration for non-violent drug addicts --Use threat of sanctions combined with rewards for compliance --Offenders must enter treatment programs ---Undergo frequent urinalysis, and intensive probation supervision ---Frequent judicial interactions, work/school requirements ---Receive sanctions for non-compliance --1st drug court established in Miami, FL in 1989 --2,600 drug courts exist in the U.S. (adults and juvenile) --Racial disparities have also been reported ---Particularly in terms of who completes the programs

White-Collar and Corporate Crime Examples

•White Collar Crimes -Cane be done by an individual or group -Embezzlement: Stealing from the company -Insider Trading: Stock transactions with non-public knowledge -Bank Fraud: Deceive bank to get a loan -Money Laundering: Disguise the source of illegal profits •Corporate Crimes -Crimes committed for benefit of the company -Price-Fixing: Companies coordinate to set (inflated) price --Unfair limit on competition, bad for consumers, like a monopoloy -Bribery: Pay to influence someone's decision (e.g., a regulator)

White-Collar and Corporate Crime

•White-collar and corporate crime constitute one of the more intransigent problems in law enforcement -White Collar Crime Definition --Crime that typically involves stealing money from a company and that is done by people who have important positions in the company - Merriam Webster -Corporate Crime Definition: --A type of white-collar crime. Committed by individuals within their legitimate occupations, for the benefit of their employing organization -The crimes are generally committed by individuals that have a significant amount of power, such as: --Businessmen and politicians ---This makes detection, enforcement and prosecution difficult

What Research Has Taught Us About Immigrants and Crime

•Why do people believe immigration is related to high crime rates? -Immigrants move into disadvantaged neighborhoods (low cost of housing) where crime is already prevalent -A large percent of immigrants are young adults (crime prone years) -Immigrants may not become attached to their new neighborhoods -Immigrants can be socially isolated and vulnerable to extortion •The reality is actually the opposite -Research consistently shows immigrants are less involved in crime --Remember research cited by US Chamber of Commerce (US COC)? •False perception of immigrant criminality -Research has shown that immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than American-born individuals •Some scholars have found immigration can have a crime-reducing effect -The Revitalization Argument (US COC reports this too) -Immigrants revitalize disadvantaged ares --Examples: Bosnian refugees in Bevo Mill area of St. Louis -Immigrants are entrepreneurs, and can contribute to economic growth (US COC, 2016) --Bosnians in St. Louis started businesses, paid $1.1 billion in taxes in 2014