JUSTICE IN COMMUNITY

Justice in Community

Justice in Community

The term community justice has been used generally to describe a preference for neighborhood-based, more accessible, and less formal justice services that, to the greatest extent possible, shift the locus of justice intervention to those most affected by crime. (Clear and Karp 1999:25)

Justice in African American Community

Overrepresentation and disparity in secure juvenile corrections have been attributed to a variety of factors including the lack of private counsel, the lack of family or community resources to qualify racial and ethnic minority youths for alternatives to detention and other community-based treatment, and biased perceptions of juvenile justice personnel that result in majority youths being dealt with more sensitively and individually. Unlike majority youths, minority youths are often forced to rely on an indigent defense. Youths represented by private counsel are less likely to be convicted and are more likely to have their cases returned to juvenile court if they are originally prosecuted as adults. Juvenile justice officials also have been found to have a more negative view of the culpability of minority youths and the economic and social stability of minority families and communities, and to perceive that the juvenile justice system is a minority youth's best chance for treatment.

Family and community resources further influence the placement of minority youths in public or private correctional institutions. Although African American and Hispanic youths are overrepresented in both types of facilities, more than half (66%) of the juveniles in public facilities are minorities. While this may be partially related to the financial costs that are often associated with private correctional facilities, recent trends indicate that slightly more minority youths currently reside in private correctional institutions than in past years. Nevertheless, minority youths, in residential placements, especially African Americans and Hispanics, are more likely to be confined behind locked doors than nonminority youths.

Researchers have long argued that the involvement of youths in juvenile justice is structured along class lines. Barry Feld (1999), for example, maintains that the juvenile court was originally intended and designed to regulate the behavior of poor and immigrant youths. The individualized treatment rendered by the juvenile court encouraged class disparity by allowing decisions to be based on social status and created a dual system of juvenile justice in which middle- and upper-class youths were treated (e.g., placed in community-based programs) and poor and immigrant youths were punished (e.g., placed in institutional facilities). Many argue that this pattern continues today with lower-class youths having a higher probability of experiencing juvenile corrections, especially secure placements, than their middle-class counterparts. Research further suggests that the general public is more willing to acknowledge disparate treatment of youths in the juvenile justice system on the basis of class rather than race. A national poll on youth and juvenile justice issues in 1999, for example, found that more than three-quarters of the public believed that wealthy youths received better treatment than poor youths, and more than 8 in 10 considered it was a serious issue if they were told that wealthy ...