Chapter 15 Justice for Juveniles, Victims, and the Global Village Irwin/McGraw-Hill © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2000

Juvenile Violent Crime Arrest Rates, United States, 1981-1997 Figure 15.1 C15-S1 Juvenile Violent Crime Arrest Rates, United States, 1981-1997 Arrests per 100,000 juveniles ages 10-17 600 500 400 300 200 100 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 Violent Crime Index Source: Howard Snyder, “Juvenile Arrest Rates for Violent Crime Index Offenses, 1981-1997” (Washington DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1998).

Offenses Excluded from Juvenile Court Jurisdictiona Table 15.1 C15-S2 Offenses Excluded from Juvenile Court Jurisdictiona Offenses Statesb Murderc Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont. Rape Delaware, district of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, New York. Kidnapping Delaware, Louisiana, Vermont. Burglary District of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, Vermont. Armed robbery District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Vermont. Otherd Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington. Hawaii: Class A felonies if one violent prior, or two violent priors in the past two years. Maryland: Any crime punishable by the death penalty. Mississippi: Any crime punishable by the death penalty. a Criminal courts can try juveniles for such crimes provided they have reached minimum age. bBecause of the different offense categories, some states are listed more than once. cThis category includes various degrees of criminal homicide, including attempted murder in some states dThis category includes offense categories such as “any offense.”. Source: Barry C. Field, “The Juvenile Court Meets the Principle of the Offense: Legislative changes in Juvenile Waiver Statutes,” Journal of Criminal Las & Criminology 78 (1987), pp. 512-514. Reprinted by special permission of Northwestern University School of Law.

U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty Map Figure 15.2 C15-S3 U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty Map

Why Victims Do Not Report Crime, 1994 Table 15.2 C15-S4 Why Victims Do Not Report Crime, 1994 Personal Household Reason Crimesa Crimesb Reported to another official 11.5% 10.2% Private or personal matter 19.5 5.4 Object recovered;offender unsuccessful 18.9 28.4 Not important enough 5.2 3.6 Insurance would not cover 0.0 1.5 Not aware crime occurred until later 0.7 5.2 Unable to recover property; no ID number 0.8 6.3 Lack of proof 3.8 10.5 Police would not want to be bothered 5.9 7.9 Police inefficient, ineffective, or biased 4.3 3.5 Fear of reprisal 3.8 0.6 Too inconvenient or time-consuming 3.9 3.2 Other reason 21.7 13.8 aPersonal crimes N = 7,707,770. bHousehold crimes N = 24,264,032. Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1996 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1997), p. 225.

Retributive versus Restorative Justice Table 15.4 C15-S5 Retributive versus Restorative Justice The Retributive Paradigm The Restorative Paradigm Crime Crime is a violation of law, is a violation or harm to and the state is the victim. people and relationships. The aim of justice The aim of justice is to establish blame is to identify obligations, (guilt) and administer to meet needs, and to pain (punishment). promote healing. The process of justice The process of justice is a conflict between involves victims, offenders, adversaries in which the and the community in an offender is pitted against effort to identify state rules, and intentions obligations and solutions, outweigh outcomes, and one maximizing the exchange side wins while the other of information (dialogue, loses. mutual agreement) between them. Source: Howard Zehr, “Justice as Restoration, Justice as Respect,” in The Justice Professional 11, no. 1-2 (1998), pp. 71-87. This special issue was edited by Dennis Sullivan and Larry Tift, under the general editorship of Roslyn Muraskin.