Pennsylvania Juvenile Probation Departments in the Wake of the Luzerne County Scandal: What Has Changed?

2021 ◽  
pp. 154-176
Author(s):  
Daniel Scott ◽  
Jennifer Boyer
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Juvenile Probation ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Luzerne County ◽  
Policies And Practices

In 2008, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania made national headlines when the “Kids for Cash Scandal” broke. As a result of the actions of the Juvenile Court Judge and other juvenile system personnel, the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice was created to develop rules to prevent the juvenile jus-tice system in Pennsylvania from failing again. The purpose of this study was to determine how juvenile probation practices have changed since the scandal and if those departments were following through with the recommendations of the Commission. While many policies and practices have changed since the scandal, such as the policies regarding gifts and gratuities, there was a lack of consistency in the magnitude of those changes.

Balanced Approach and Restorative Justice Efforts in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania

2001 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
RONALD J. SEYKO
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Special Session ◽  
Court System ◽  
Allegheny County ◽  
Juvenile Probation ◽  
Balanced Approach

On November 17, 1995, the governor of Pennsylvania signed into law Special Session Act 33 of 1995, which redefined the purpose of Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system to incorporate the principles of the Balanced Approach and Restorative Justice (BARJ) philosophy. This article describes the genesis of the new law, explains the BARJ model, and illustrates the effect that the law is having on the juvenile court system in Allegheny County. The article specifically focuses on the numerous projects that the Allegheny County juvenile probation department has instituted to meet the BARJ obligation.

scholarly journals El efecto del género en la toma de decisiones en el sistema de Justicia Juvenil (The effect of gender on decision-making in the Juvenile Justice System)

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 442-464
Author(s):  
Ricardo Gallego Córcoles ◽  
Raquel Bartolomé Gutiérrez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Toma De Decisiones

Existe evidencia de que cuestiones de género influyen en la toma de decisiones en Justicia Juvenil en diversos países. Sin embargo, en España no existen estudios empíricos al respecto. Una aproximación a nuestra realidad puede servir de punto de partida para realizar un análisis más profundo sobre la cuestión. Se diseñó un estudio descriptivo de naturaleza retrospectiva. La muestra estuvo constituida por 166 jóvenes, 127 chicos y 39 chicas, expedientados en el Juzgado de Menores de Guadalajara por cometer algún delito. Los resultados muestran que no existen diferencias significativas entre chicos y chicas en cuanto a las decisiones que se toman con respecto a ellos en ninguna de las fases del procedimiento judicial. Tampoco si se analizan únicamente los delitos violentos, tradicionalmente considerados propios de los chicos. Todas las profesionales que han intervenido en la toma de decisiones analizada son mujeres. Esta circunstancia puede influir en los resultados. There is enough evidence in scientific literature about the effect of gender on the decision-making in the Juvenile Justice System. However, in Spain, there are no known empirical studies in this regard. An approximation to our reality might serve as a starting point for a deeper analysis on the issue. The aim of the present study was to perform a descriptive, retrospective study of the cases disposed to the juvenile court judge during eight months in the Juvenile Court of Guadalajara, Spain. The final data set contained 166 cases, 127 boys and 39 girls disposed to the Juvenile Court of Guadalajara for committing some crime in the territorial scope of this province, No differences between sexes occurred in any case. Neither if only violent crimes are considered. All professionals who have intervened in the decision-making were women. This circumstance could influence the results obtained.

Social Control in a School Setting: Evaluating a School-Based Boot Camp

2001 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 573-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad Trulson ◽  
Ruth Triplett ◽  
Clete Snell
Keyword(s):  
Public School ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Social Control ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
School Setting ◽  
Boot Camp ◽  
Juvenile Probation ◽  
Public Discussion ◽  
The Past ◽  
School Based

In the past few years, several dramatic incidents have spurred renewed efforts to control violence and prevent crime in schools. Although it has yet to become a matter of much public discussion, what is particularly notable about many of these efforts is the increased collaboration of criminal and juvenile justice agencies with schools in their capacity as formal agents of control. In the present study, the authors evaluate one program that embodies this type of collaboration—Specialized Treatment and Rehabilitation (STAR). STAR is an innovative juvenile boot camp program in a public school setting that is operated through the combined efforts of the school, the juvenile court, and the juvenile probation department. Results of the evaluation revealed that although the program had a relatively small impact on recidivism, perceptions garnered from parents, teachers, and STAR participants were quite favorable for the program overall.

scholarly journals Achieving Juvenile Justice through Abolition: A Critical Review of Social Work’s Role in Shaping the Juvenile Legal System and Steps toward Achieving an Antiracist Future

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 211
Author(s):  
Durrell M. Washington ◽  
Toyan Harper ◽  
Alizé B. Hill ◽  
Lester J. Kern
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Deviant Behavior ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Black Youth ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Juvenile Courts

The first juvenile court was created in 1899 with the help of social workers who conceptualized their actions as progressive. Youth were deemed inculpable for certain actions since, cognitively, their brains were not as developed as those of adults. Thus, separate measures were created to rehabilitate youth who exhibited delinquent and deviant behavior. Over one hundred years later, we have a system that disproportionately arrests, confines, and displaces Black youth. This paper critiques social work’s role in helping develop the first juvenile courts, while highlighting the failures of the current juvenile legal system. We then use P.I.C. abolition as a theoretical framework to offer guidance on how social work can once again assist in the transformation of the juvenile legal system as a means toward achieving true justice.

A Parens Patriae Figure or Impartial Fact Finder: Policy Questions and Conflicts for the Juvenile Court Judge

2001 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B. Sanborn
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Probation Officers ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Juvenile Courts ◽  
Defense Attorneys ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
Adult Court ◽  
Parens Patriae

For several decades, juvenile courts functioned like clinics. Judges assigned there were instructed to assume a variety of roles: jurist, psychologist, counselor, sociologist, and parent. The In re Gault decision in 1967 granted juvenile defendants several constitutional rights that transformed juvenile courts into criminal court-like operations. Juvenile court judges have not been told whether they should continue to be paternal or emulate their counterparts in adult court; research has not addressed this subject. In this study, 100 juvenile court workers (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers) from three juvenile courts (urban, suburban, rural) were interviewed to ascertain how judges operate in juvenile court and what these workers perceive to be the proper role for the judge. The data show that most workers believe that the role of the juvenile court judge is and should be unique.

scholarly journals MODEL PERADILAN RESTORATIF DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN ANAK (Kajian tentang Praktik Mediasi Pelaku dan Korban dalam Proses Peradilan Anak di Wilayah Hukum Balai Pemasyarakatan Purwokerto)

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angkasa Angkasa ◽  
Saryono Hanadi ◽  
Muhammad Budi Setyadi
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Police Department ◽  
Justice Model ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Mediation Practice

Legal fundament of implementation of restorative justice in the phase investigation of juvenile justice system  in Indonesia stated in article 5 sentence (1) Law No. 8 Year 1981 concerning KUHAP; article 42 Law No. 3 Year 1997 concerning juvenile court, article 16 sentence ( 1) letter (l), sentence (2) and article 18  Law No. 2 Year 2002 concerning Police Department of Republic of Indonesia, Confidential Telegram of Kabareskrim No. Pol. TR/359/DIT,I/VI/2008. Mediation Perpetrator and Victim in the course of Jurisdiction of Child in jurisdiction territory of prison in Purwokerto, in the form of peace among victim and perpetrator of this child, is conducted in inspection phase, is in prosecution phase and inspection of justice have never been conducted by mediation. Implementation of Mediation in case of child in Jurisdiction territory of Bapas Purwokerto, not yet earned a Restorative Justice Model. This Matter is based on fact that goals of this mediation practice tend to only aim to decontrol continuation. Kata kunci: Juvenile Justice System; Restorative Justice Model; Mediation; prison

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document