Pennsylvania - PA Council of Chief Juvenile Probation Officers
Models for Change Mentioned
Daily Herald (IL)
‘Letters: Community-based care vital for youth’ – August 16, 2010
The new report on the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice by Models for Change, as stated in the Aug. 3 editorial "Recommit to serving troubled teens," recommends better community-based and after care and acknowledges the role of families to help youth exiting prison. But there has been no comparable study to address the strategic challenge of our current juvenile system: How to move resources away from the eight large juvenile prisons into multiple, smaller, community-based facilities…
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
‘Opinion: Put more emphasis on programs that deter youth crime’ – August 18, 2010
With regard to The Baltimore Sun editorial "Deterring youth crime" (Aug. 16), the best way to improve the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center is to keep kids out of it. And the best way to do that is to partner with community-based organizations to provide interventions that we know work…
The Pre-Adjudication Coordination & Transition (PACT) center in West Baltimore takes on some of our most troubled youth offenders, keeps them out of danger, keeps them out of lock-up, works with their families, provides crucial resources and supports, and does it all for a fraction of the cost of incarceration. The MacArthur Foundation has recognized it as a national model. But instead of replicating this program—in other parts of Baltimore, or making it available to girls—DJS refuses to fund it. Instead, the agency seeks millions of dollars to build new facilities that we have no reason to believe will be better than the ones we have now…
Pennsylvania Summary
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
‘Slaying case's long delay on youth status called travesty’ – August 08, 2010
Police took nine days to arrest 17-year-old Lance Dempster and charge him as an adult in the 2007 shooting death of a pizza deliveryman in Wilkinsburg…
The Philadelphia Inquirer
‘Letters: 'Sexting' is already a crime in Pennsylvania’ – August 10, 2010
Wednesday's editorial "Juvenile behavior" incorrectly suggests that legislation currently being considered in Harrisburg would criminalize "sexting." Sexting is already a crime in Pennsylvania…
Reading Eagle
‘9 to lose jobs at Berks County Youth Center’ – August 11, 2010
Nine people will lose their jobs at the Berks County Youth Center at the end of the week when a program designed to help juvenile offenders become responsible, law-abiding adults is discontinued…
The Patriot-News (Harrisburg)
‘Letters: Schaffner Youth Center closing would be major mistake’ – August 11, 2010
On July 29, Dauphin County commissioners announced that Schaffner Youth Center would be eliminated. I have gone into Schaffner as a summer school teacher and tutor for years…
The Times Leader (Wilkes-Barre)
‘Opinion: Pace of case frustratingly slow’ – August 11, 2010
LOST IN THE hubbub of last week’s sentencing of ex-Luzerne County commissioner Greg Skrepenak was this discouraging development: another delay in scheduling the public corruption trial of former county judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr…
The Philadelphia Inquirer
‘Editorial: Shouldn't delay justice’ – August 11, 2010
When he was packing kids off to prison, then-Luzerne County Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. was known for dispensing lightning-fast justice. But now comes word that Ciavarella's own corruption trial won't take place until February…
Williamsport Sun-Gazette
‘More than 50 may lose jobs’ – August 12, 2010
After nearly 35 years, indirectly due to Pennsylvania's struggling economy, Laurel Youth Services is facing the closure of its residential and diagnostic units in Blossburg…
The Reporter (Lansdale)
‘Teen waives hearing on rape charges’ – August 16, 2010
An 18-year-old Perkiomen boy has pleaded not guilty to charges he allegedly assaulted two girls in a sexual or indecent manner during separate drinking parties in October…
Erie Times-News
‘Teen accused in Arrington shooting to be tried as an adult’ – August 17, 2010
Larry Lemon, the 18-year-old accused of gunning down another man in front of a convenience store in January, won't get another chance in the juvenile justice system…
Times Leader (Wilkes-Barre)
‘Juvenile justice task force notes good, bad, plans future’ – August 18, 2010
Children no longer go before a judge without an attorney, a new law guarantees restitution to victims of juveniles who had their records expunged and the number of juveniles going into the court system has dropped…
Citizens’ Voice (Wilkes-Barre
‘DA: Juvenile cases will be evaluated individually’ – August 18, 2010
As former Luzerne County Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. prepares for his federal corruption trial next February, a task force of county officials and state advocates is overhauling the juvenile court system he tarnished with a decade of unconstitutional rulings, terse hearings and harsh sentences…
National Summary
KARK-TV (AR)
‘Praise for Progress of Arkansas' Juvenile Justice System’ – August 7, 2010
Arkansas' juvenile justice system is getting applause for making strides…
The Shreveport Times (LA)
‘Juvenile justice: Schools key to success’ – August 8, 2010
Shreveport attorney Clay Walker recently was honored as an outstanding national leader in juvenile justice reform, one of only four people recognized by the National Juvenile Justice Network. Walker is deputy public defender for the state and director of Juvenile Defender Services at the Louisiana Public Defender Board…
Hartford Courant (CT)
‘Letters: Kids Tried As Juveniles Are Less Likely To Repeat Crimes’ – August 9, 2010
A letter writer asserted that the "statewide cause of safer teen driving will be better served" if the law requires the young driver charged in a January school bus crash to be tried as an adult [Aug. 4, "Teen's Trial Shouldn't Be Moved"]…
The Florida Times-Union
‘Experts want less jail, more treatment for errant Georgia juveniles’ – August 9, 2010
A parade of judges, prosecutors and children's advocates told a Senate subcommittee Monday that the state needs to revise the law on juveniles to shift from putting mild cases behind bars to putting their entire families in treatment…
The Washington Post – Online
‘Youth facility most overcrowded: Group’ – August 10, 2010
The Cheltenham Youth Facility was the most overcrowded of Maryland's largest secure detention centers between April and July, the state's juvenile justice watchdog says in a new report…
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
‘Federal monitoring of long-troubled city youth lockup to end’ – August 11, 2010
Federal monitoring of the long-troubled Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center is likely to end soon, state juvenile services officials said Wednesday, making it the third youth facility in Maryland to be lifted from such oversight in little more than two years…
Columbus Telegram (NE)
‘Committee focusing on minority contact disparity’ – August 13, 2010
A disproportionate number of “minority contacts” within Platte County’s juvenile justice system has prompted one group to reach out to the Hispanic community to help curb the problem…
Lansing State Journal (MI)
‘O'Brien: Life without parole is wrong penalty for juveniles’ – August 15, 2010
Did you know that if a juvenile is found guilty as an adult in Michigan the current mandatory sentence is life in prison without parole?...
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
‘Editorial: Deterring youth crime’ – August 16, 2010
It's certainly welcome news that conditions in the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center have improved enough to persuade the U.S. Department of Justice to lift federal oversight of the youth lockup it has held under scrutiny since 2007…
New York Daily News
‘Youth detention shift’ – August 18, 2010
Twenty years ago, Alex Mejia spent two years as a teenage inmate at Bridges Juvenile Center on charges of drug possession, robbery and auto theft. He had turned to the streets as a way to try and ease the burden on his mother after his father left…
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (GA)
‘Opinion: Rethink how we punish juveniles’ – August 18, 2010
The desire for revenge that clouds our judgment in dealing with juvenile offenders must end. The original juvenile justice system was based on a rehabilitative model that offered treatment to young offenders. But rehabilitation was replaced by retribution in the 1990s as a result of a staggering increase in juvenile crime…
Ventura County Star (CA)
‘Editorial: Second chance for young lifers’ – August 18, 2010
We support legislation that allows for the review of cases involving juveniles sentenced to life without parole after 10 years, potentially allowing some of them to receive a new sentence of 25 years to life…
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
‘Letters: Social programs only part of juvenile justice solution’ – August 20, 2010
I found Sonia Kumar's letter ("Improving Juvenile Justice," Readers Respond, Aug. 18) to be very interesting, but very one-sided in believing that more programs will improve a juvenile's situation. In part this is true, but I believe that a major part of the problem is the lack of facilities, as there are those children that do need to be removed from society, to protect other children and society…
Top Stories – Models for Change Mentioned
Letters: Community-based care vital for youth
Daily Herald (IL)
August 16, 2010
The new report on the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice by Models for Change, as stated in the Aug. 3 editorial "Recommit to serving troubled teens," recommends better community-based and after care and acknowledges the role of families to help youth exiting prison. But there has been no comparable study to address the strategic challenge of our current juvenile system: How to move resources away from the eight large juvenile prisons into multiple, smaller, community-based facilities.
The failure to prepare another key component of juvenile care - a strategic plan for the resources needed to support youth in returning to their communities, staying in school and getting critical psychiatric outpatient treatment - undermines the credibility of the planning process. As advocates for children and families, The Child Care Association of Illinois echoes the report's call for rehabilitative and treatment services for youth and the important role these services can play in helping youth create a more positive future.
Additionally, the new report helpfully highlights the complex needs of juvenile justice youth and highlights the fact that the Illinois system must receive additional resources and support from the Illinois General Assembly and governor.
Moreover, this report can serve as a good foundation for the discussions on mental health services for youth as the proposed merger with the Department of Children and Family Services goes forward. However, critical strategic planning to deliver the right resources and to deliver community-based care must be launched to have a viable road map for the future of juvenile care. Those missing pieces leave the transition as complicated as ever.
Marge Berglind
President
Child Care Association of Illinois
Opinion: Put more emphasis on programs that deter youth crime
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
August 18, 2010
With regard to The Baltimore Sun editorial "Deterring youth crime" (Aug. 16), the best way to improve the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center is to keep kids out of it. And the best way to do that is to partner with community-based organizations to provide interventions that we know work. No one knows these kids better than the families and communities they come from—and no one has more incentive to see them succeed.
We are setting up these kids, and the Department of Juvenile Services, to fail when we expect a centralized state agency to provide individualized solutions without engaging local partners. Until we start investing in community programs instead of facilities that simply warehouse kids, we have no right to expect more.
The Pre-Adjudication Coordination & Transition (PACT) center in West Baltimore takes on some of our most troubled youth offenders, keeps them out of danger, keeps them out of lock-up, works with their families, provides crucial resources and supports, and does it all for a fraction of the cost of incarceration. The MacArthur Foundation has recognized it as a national model. But instead of replicating this program—in other parts of Baltimore, or making it available to girls—DJS refuses to fund it. Instead, the agency seeks millions of dollars to build new facilities that we have no reason to believe will be better than the ones we have now.
The Female Intervention Team unit—an all-female juvenile probation unit housed at BCJJC—is another missed opportunity. At one time, Baltimore's FIT unit was a national model for innovation in juvenile service delivery. It creatively responded to the unique challenges of girls in crisis—whose needs and delinquency patterns differ from boys. But the program is a shadow of what it once was, felled by budget cuts and the loss of other community programs.
It is not hard to figure out the right thing to do—but it's hard to do it when success is measured by facilities, not kids.
Sonia Kumar, Baltimore
The writer is an attorney with the ACLU of Maryland Juvenile Justice Initiative
Top Stories - Pennsylvania
Slaying case's long delay on youth status called travesty
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Jonathan D. Silver
August 08, 2010
Police took nine days to arrest 17-year-old Lance Dempster and charge him as an adult in the 2007 shooting death of a pizza deliveryman in Wilkinsburg.
His lawyers took more than two years to request that his case be moved to juvenile court.
That petition -- essentially asking the court to treat Mr. Dempster like a child open to treatment instead of as a grown-up potentially facing incarceration -- has yet to be heard by a judge.
And by now so much time has passed that the petition is effectively moot.
Last month, nearly 31/2 years after his arrest in April 2007, Mr. Dempster turned 21 -- the age at which juvenile court's authority ends. A hearing on the juvenile court petition is scheduled for Sept. 22. How the court and Mr. Dempster's attorney will resolve his situation is unclear.
"It's a travesty. It's horrendous," social worker Randolph A. Matuscak said. Mr. Matuscak evaluated Mr. Dempster for his attorney in the Allegheny County Office of Conflict Counsel and believes that the case should have been transferred.
"It's a horrible thing to do to a kid."
Mr. Dempster's case echoes problems with delays in decertification hearings that have vexed the court system for more than a decade.
'Defeats the whole purpose'
Juveniles charged with serious offenses -- both homicides and other crimes listed in a 1996 state law known as Act 33 -- are treated as adults and have spent months or years in adult jails before getting the chance to make an argument for transfer.
"I have testified in over 350 Act 33 cases and over 25 juvenile homicide cases. I have never been involved in a case like this," Mr. Matuscak said.
For juveniles facing the potential of stiff sentences in the adult criminal justice system, the upside to moving to juvenile court -- called being decertified -- is tremendous.
"I can't see how there could possibly be a downside," said juvenile court Judge Kim Berkeley Clark.
In juvenile court, the focus for those found to have committed crimes is on rehabilitation, supervision and treatment, not punishment. There is no mandatory sentencing as exists for adults.
"I think it's unfortunate, 31/2 years. I mean, that defeats the whole purpose of decertification, of being considered," said state Superior Court Judge Cheryl Allen, a former juvenile court judge in Allegheny County.
"Clearly given the circumstances, those motions need to be not only filed, but they need to be heard in a timely manner so that the cases like the one you've stated would be avoided."
Homicide cases different
There is no guarantee that had the petition been heard, Mr. Dempster's case would have been shifted to juvenile court.
In fact, the Office of Conflict Counsel -- which represents clients the public defender's office cannot because of a conflict of interest -- did not file a petition to transfer until December 2009 because of an assumption that trial Judge David R. Cashman would deny it.
"Our explanation is we evaluated it," said J. Richard Narvin, the office's chief counsel. "I supported the decision not to file it. I authorized the decision not to file it. There was no way I believed it would be granted. I didn't think it was appropriate in this case.
"Best practice is we should have filed it earlier. Is it going to change the outcome of this case? No, it's not."
Attorney Veronica Brestensky eventually filed the petition during a lull in the case while Mr. Dempster's co-defendant sought a delay.
"The decision was made that since we're going to be wasting time, we might as well file a decertification," Mr. Narvin said.
Ms. Brestensky declined comment.
Judge Clark said lawyers tend to treat juvenile homicide cases differently from Act 33 cases involving other serious crimes for decertificant purposes.
"For whatever reason, there aren't very many homicide cases where motions to transfer are filed," she said. "I think most people perceive that murder is not appropriate for transfer. I'm not sure why. I'm not sure that's a correct assessment."
Delay for one affects both
According to police, on April 19, 2007 a person who said his name was Lance called Vocelli Pizza and asked for a delivery to the 500 block of Campbell Street in Wilkinsburg.
Deliveryman Boston Smithwick, 48, was fatally shot outside the home.
Police arrested Mr. Dempster and another juvenile, William Mitchell, who lived on that street. Both were charged with homicide.
An unnamed witness saw Mr. Mitchell, then 17, pull out a sawed-off shotgun, point it at Mr. Smithwick and pump it, according to a police affidavit. The witness heard a bang while running away.
Police also learned that Mr. Dempster told someone in a phone call that Mr. Mitchell pulled the trigger after the victim allegedly said, "You're going to have to shoot me" and attempted to grab the gun.
"We was going to rob him," Mr. Dempster told the witness, police said.
Lisa G. Middleman of the public defender's office, who originally represented Mr. Mitchell, never filed a petition to transfer her client's case to juvenile court. She said in an interview that she could not remember why she did not file.
The court appointed lawyer Bruce Carsia to take over Mr. Mitchell's case in June 2009 after Ms. Middleman asked to withdraw because of a conflict of interest. By September, Mr. Carsia had filed a motion to transfer.
Problems related to expert testimony on Mr. Mitchell's behalf led to a delay in his decertification hearing. He turned 20 in January.
Because the cases of the defendants are joined -- meaning they are to be tried together for reasons of efficiency -- their decertification hearings have been bundled together as well. A delay for one affects both.
However, Judge Cashman said last week that he would have had no problem separating the cases for the purposes of a decertification hearing. He has not done that, though, because he was not asked to do so by Mr. Dempster's lawyers.
"If they came in tomorrow morning and said, 'We'd like to do our decertification Monday and separate it from Mitchell,' I'd say, 'Fine,' " the judge said.
Record back to age 10
The trial for both men has been delayed for numerous reasons, including postponements sought by defense attorneys as well as one sought by prosecutors while a jury was being picked in January 2009.
Although the odds are against a juvenile being decertified in a case involving a homicide, it is not unprecedented. Mr. Matuscak said he has testified in 10 such cases between 1999 and 2009 that ended with defendants being sent to juvenile court.
In his report, Mr. Matuscak cited a variety of reasons he believed that Mr. Dempster was a good candidate to transfer to juvenile court.
Mr. Dempster is "ingrained with a foundation of moral behavior and attitudes from his mother and stepfather, who have spent their lives teaching their children how to live as responsible, accountable and law-abiding individuals. He clearly does know right from wrong, which does not negate the fact, however, that as a teenager he was capable of making some foolish decisions and poor choices," Mr. Matuscak wrote in a March evaluation.
Those "foolish" decisions reflect a juvenile record that dates back to age 10. Mr. Dempster has appeared in juvenile court three times on cases involving stealing soda and coins from a shop and vandalizing vehicles, being a passenger in a stolen car and stealing a car.
"While acknowledging the extremely ... egregious nature of this offense, it is this evaluator's professional opinion that a preponderance of the evidence ascertained in this case weighs in favor of Lance's transfer to the jurisdiction of the Allegheny County Juvenile Court in this matter," Mr. Matuscak wrote.
A long shot?
Petitioning to transfer a case to juvenile court is a gamble. Some experts say there are few situations in which at least filing the paperwork and taking a chance to have a client decertified would not be warranted.
One possible scenario could be a case in which a juvenile cooperates with prosecutors against another defendant in return for a lesser charge that leads to a light sentence.
Another situation could be a defendant taking a plea bargain that would result in probation in the adult system and lead to release sooner than in the juvenile system. That would be unlikely to occur in a case involving a homicide.
A third scenario is a defendant whose defense is so good that an attorney is willing to go before a jury and seek an acquittal -- provided that the trial occurs speedily.
"The kid has a defendable case," Mr. Narvin said.
There are no jury trials in juvenile court, so defendants are left with the option to either plead guilty or put their fate in the hands of a judge.
"If you get decertified, it limits your ability to defend your client on the actual charge, but it helps you make sure your client has a life beyond life in prison or 20 to 40 years in prison," said Lee Rothman, a defense attorney.
Experts like Mr. Matuscak look at a variety of factors, including age, juvenile criminal history, maturity, criminal sophistication, mental capacity, threat to the public and amenability to treatment. In many cases, they recommend decertification, but the ultimate decision rests with the judge.
Regardless of whether one agrees with asking for decertification in a case, there is a consensus among lawyers, judges and evaluators that the sooner a petition is filed, the better.
"The basic thing is if there's merit in having the case return to juvenile court, the decision has to be made quickly because the argument is that society will be as well off or better off if the juvenile justice system can take the time it has, which is the 31/2 years which it just wasted, working with the kid to turn him around," said Robert Schwartz, executive director of the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia. "It's a long shot, but a long shot is different than a nonshot. And what he has now is no chance at all."
Letters: 'Sexting' is already a crime in Pennsylvania
The Philadelphia Inquirer
August 10, 2010
Wednesday's editorial "Juvenile behavior" incorrectly suggests that legislation currently being considered in Harrisburg would criminalize "sexting." Sexting is already a crime in Pennsylvania.
What most people don't understand is that anyone, even a minor, who sends sexually explicit photos of kids under 18 from his or her cell phone to another cell phone commits a serious crime.
Under current law, sexting is a felony offense. Teens currently charged with sexting, if convicted, could face placement away from home; end up as a registered sex offenders; and could be dogged the rest of their lives with a permanent criminal record.
Reasonable, understanding prosecutors have sought legislative change to downgrade the offense of sexting. To be sure, there may be some instances where a felony charge is appropriate. More common are cases in which teens may be acting impulsively. But those actions still put children in harm's way. In those circumstances, a felony charge - currently a prosecutor's only option - is too severe. School-based detention isn't severe enough.
A recent federal court decision does not prevent prosecutors from charging teens with sexting, as your editorial suggested. The plainly constitutional legislative proposal, if passed, will provide prosecutors with legal consistency and a clear, measured approach to these unique circumstances.
We agree that education is part of a rational response. That is why our legislative focus has been to recognize that in many of these cases, education and diversionary programs are the appropriate legal response.
Edward M. Marsico Jr.
President, Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association
Harrisburg
9 to lose jobs at Berks County Youth Center
Taxpayers will save money when program to help juvenile offenders ends, officials say
Reading Eagle
By Mary E. Young
August 11, 2010
Nine people will lose their jobs at the Berks County Youth Center at the end of the week when a program designed to help juvenile offenders become responsible, law-abiding adults is discontinued.
The county commissioners said the decision to end the Priorities Responsibilities Enhancement Program, or PREP, will save taxpayers money by eliminating 13 positions. Some positions were vacant, and some have been changed.
Berks' cost to operate the program is about $315 per participant per day. The juvenile probation program has begun using outside agencies that can provide the same services for $125 to $150 per participant per day, Commissioner Kevin S. Barnhardt said.
About 80 youths, mostly 17- and 18-year-olds, participated in the program annually.
The total savings was not immediately available.
Human Resources Director Jennifer E. Biehn said her department is trying to help the people being laid off find other positions in the county.
Chief Juvenile Probation Officer Robert N. Williams said the loss of jobs is unfortunate but unavoidable.
More services now are being provided to juveniles in their homes because those services involve the family, prevent juveniles from repeating their offenses and cost less, he said.
By using these types of programs, the county has reduced the number of juveniles placed in residential programs to 199 in 2009 from 333 in 2007, Williams said.
"The goal is to strengthen families to solve their problems on their own and not rely on the social services system," he said. "We're trying to save kids so they don't end up in prison. There's less victims and less placements."
Meanwhile, Barnhardt and Commissioner Mark C. Scott agreed to create five full-time temporary positions for counselors at the youth center in Bern Township. Commissioner Christian Y. Leinbach was not present.
Biehn said the temporary workers will ease the transition and fill in for people on leaves of absence.
Overtime costs will be reduced as a result, Barnhardt said.
Letters: Schaffner Youth Center closing would be major mistake
The Patriot-News (Harrisburg)
August 11, 2010
On July 29, Dauphin County commissioners announced that Schaffner Youth Center would be eliminated. I have gone into Schaffner as a summer school teacher and tutor for years.
I believe that this is a deplorable idea. I have had the opportunity to observe Schaffner’s professional staff in action.
The individuals that are employed at this facility are not guards. They are counselors and role models. Many children are in need of the 24-hour watch care that is provided by Schaffner’s employees. Some of the young offenders are volatile and this is challenging. These employees have hundreds of hours of special training. Highly trained and knowledgeable employees would be lost.
Scheduled visits with parents or guardians are important to the juvenile offenders. Vital visits would be difficult if the young people are sent to other counties.
In many cases, the care given by Schaffner’s staff is unique in the lives of these young people. The neighborhood centers cannot provide the total attention that many desperately need. Parole officers and others who deal with the youth outside of the center often have a workload that is overwhelming.
KATHRYN ECKERT, Susquehanna Twp.
Opinion: Pace of case frustratingly slow
The Times Leader (Wilkes-Barre)
August 11, 2010
LOST IN THE hubbub of last week’s sentencing of ex-Luzerne County commissioner Greg Skrepenak was this discouraging development: another delay in scheduling the public corruption trial of former county judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr.
The federal government’s case against Ciavarella won’t go to trial until at least Feb. 7, 2011. That’s two years after he and his onetime co-defendant, ex-judge Michael Conahan, stood in a Scranton courtroom and told a federal judge they were “Guilty, your honor” of a fraud charge stemming from the kids-for-cash scandal. That plea deal, which a judge later rejected, would have put the duo in a federal penitentiary for 87 months.
Last month Conahan again pleaded guilty – this time, to a racketeering conspiracy charge – and now faces up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
But Ciavarella, invoking his unquestionable right, has opted to challenge the 48-count indictment at a trial.
The irony is not lost that the two ex-jurists were the first people charged in a Northeastern Pennsylvania public corruption probe that has snared 28 other public officials or businessmen. Many of the people who have pleaded guilty since then will be out of prison or will have fulfilled the terms of their home confinement before a court hears the abuse-of-power allegations against Ciavarella.
As juvenile court judge, Ciavarella ordered certain teens hauled off to detention centers, some of them without proper legal representation and with little chance to defend themselves. But now the ex-judge, protected by a respected legal team, is making sure he has every option the law allows at his disposal.
There’s not even a guarantee that his trial will begin next February. A judge will entertain moving the trial to Delaware if it appears widespread publicity has encumbered local jury selection. In the meantime, the juveniles who Ciavarella sentenced with deliberate disregard for their constitutional rights remain on the sidelines.
On Feb. 12, 2009, a federal prosecutor said his staff would interview juveniles sentenced by Ciavarella and allow some of them to testify at sentencing. We hope that announcement still holds, because the voices seldom heard – those of the young people at the heart of this case – deserve to have the court’s ear.
Federal authorities should have a mission: Bring this case to a fair trial without unnecessary delay. For the sake of real justice, a full airing in open court is needed to bring this sad chapter in Luzerne County history to a close.
Editorial: Shouldn't delay justice
The Philadelphia Inquirer
August 11, 2010
When he was packing kids off to prison, then-Luzerne County Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. was known for dispensing lightning-fast justice. But now comes word that Ciavarella's own corruption trial won't take place until February.
That's more than two years since federal authorities first charged Ciavarella and the county's former president judge, Michael T. Conahan, with raking in $2.8 million in kickbacks from two private juvenile-detention facilities.
Call it justice delayed, if not denied.
Conahan, at least, has agreed to plead guilty to a corruption charge. He awaits sentencing, but Ciavarella, 60, now long off the bench, plans to fight the charges in court.
Things would have moved more quickly, but a federal judge earlier this year rejected the initial guilty pleas from the two men. That restarted the legal process and, while U.S. District Judge Edwin M. Kosik was pushing for a November trial, scheduling conflicts and other issues require a delay until 2011, the judge said Thursday.
The irony is that Ciavarella sent hundreds of kids to the private jails over a five-year period, often after holding perfunctory hearings that lasted just minutes. Many of the juveniles hadn't done anything that warranted jail time. One youth's sentence was set by Ciavarella based on the number of birds perched outside a courtroom window.
It's a credit to the judicial system, of course, that Ciavarella will be given the due process he's alleged to have denied so many teens.
Even though Ciavarella's trial has been delayed, state court officials and Harrisburg lawmakers should not wait to move ahead with implementing key reforms in the juvenile-justice system.
The reforms include boosting public funding to defend indigent juveniles, speeding the appeals process, opening juvenile court hearings, and creating a statewide watchdog for juvenile cases.
In addition, the state's Judicial Conduct Board has to be more diligent in probing misconduct by judges. The board's weak response to the initial allegations involving the judges enabled the conspiracy to continue and grow at the expense of kids.
Justice for these corrupt judges can't come soon enough.
More than 50 may lose jobs
Williamsport Sun-Gazette
By CHERYL R. CLARKE
August 12, 2010
BLOSSBURG - After nearly 35 years, indirectly due to Pennsylvania's struggling economy, Laurel Youth Services is facing the closure of its residential and diagnostic units in Blossburg.
The units will close effective Oct. 1, causing more than 50 full- and part-time employees to lose their jobs.
Forty of those are full-time positions and about 10 are part-time, and include therapists, child care workers, child care supervisors, food services workers, housekeeping and maintenance people for the building.
Located in the former Blossburg State Hospital, the facility has provided quality residential services for children since 1975, said director Dan Styborski.
Established as Northern Tier Youth Services, the then-small diagnostic program offered comprehensive evaluations and recommendations to the Pennsylvania courts regarding children who did not easily fit into existing services in the Juvenile Court Justice System.
Over the years, the programs contracted with up to 45 counties within the state and also worked with New York and Vermont, Styborski said. But due to ongoing problems with dwindling budget revenues, the state has made significant changes to its policies regarding children and youth service programs.
Last year the number of counties was down to 25.
"The changes started in 2004 with the state's MA realignment into what the state refers to as the Integrated Children's Services Initiative. It has been those systemic changes within the state that has led to this situation," he said.
A greater effort was put into finding alternative funding sources for youth services and to find programs that work with children in their home communities as opposed to residential programs, resulting in fewer referrals and reimbursement rates that do not match the growing cost of diagnostic and residential care.
"Back in March we reduced staffing when we did some restructuring hoping it would work, but with no increases since '08, along with dwindling referrals ... it just became unsustainable," Styborski said, citing 2003 when there were 167 referrals, which dwindled to 65 in 2009. This year it was fewer than 60, he added.
Even with the closing, Styborski said Laurel Youth Services will continue to operate its programs in Williamsport and Greensburg. "We will continue to offer Tioga County specialized foster care, functional family therapy, in-home services, adoptions services as well as operate our offenders' program, La Sa Quik, out of Cogan Station," he said.
There also is an office in Greensburg that handles specialized foster care and adoption services.
Styborski said that it is anticipated at least 20 percent of employees affected will be assimilated into other Laurel Health System services, maybe more, depending on the openings.
"We'll lessen the impact as much as we can," he said.
The residential treatment programs for at risk youth aged 12 to 18 are referred through the court system, he said.
"Typically they stay here for six to nine months for the residential piece, and for the diagnostic part it is a 45-day stay," Styborski said.
During the course of the stay, the participants receive a psychological evaluation, psychiatric evaluation, educational assessment, and physical evaluation, and a social interview is conducted with the parents and teachers, too, in their home community compile a social history.
The assessments, along with the youth's behavior while in care, are compiled into a report with recommendations for the referring agencies to review and use.
The county pays for the program, but it is funded through the state, Styborski said.
"Sometimes the counties may ask the parents for a contribution, depending on what is designated in the court rulings," he added.
Styborski said it costs about $1.2 million annually to run all the programs.
Over the last two years, Laurel Youth Services has sustained losses in these programs, and with the economic environment and the movement of the state to services other than congregate care, it was decided to discontinue these services.
"We have been unable to find the adequate resources to sustain our program," he said. "While it is disheartening to see residential and diagnostic youth services disappear from Pennsylvania, Laurel Youth Services does support other avenues that keep children closer to home. Keeping families involved with the children is important, but there will always be a need for residential programs for children in need of a more intense level of care and supervision," he said.
Teen waives hearing on rape charges
The Reporter (Lansdale)
By Carl Hessler, Jr.
August 16, 2010
An 18-year-old Perkiomen boy has pleaded not guilty to charges he allegedly assaulted two girls in a sexual or indecent manner during separate drinking parties in October.
Colby Joseph Davis, of Tudor Road, waived his arraignment and pleaded not guilty to charges of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, sexual assault, aggravated indecent assault, indecent assault and simple assault in connection with alleged incidents that occurred between Oct. 3 and Oct. 31 of 2009.
By waiving his arraignment Davis did not have to appear before a judge for a formal reading of the charges lodged against him.
Judge William J. Furber Jr. scheduled Davis’ trial for Nov. 8.
Davis was 17 at the time of the alleged assaults. However, county Juvenile Court Judge Wendy Demchick-Alloy previously ordered that Davis be transferred from juvenile court consideration to adult court to face the charges.
Davis, who remains in the county jail in lieu of $150,000 cash bail, is represented by defense lawyer William E. Moore. Assistant District Attorney Samantha Cauffman is prosecuting the case.
“In both of these incidents, Davis saw females drinking alcohol in a group setting and used a ploy to separate them from the rest of the group. He then asked the girls to have sex with him and forced himself upon them when they refused his advances,” state police Trooper Paul J. Carr Jr. alleged in an arrest affidavit.
If he is convicted of all the charges in adult court, Davis faces a possible maximum sentence of 32-to-64-years in prison. Had he remained in juvenile court and been adjudicated delinquent on the charges, Davis could have been kept under court supervision only until he is 21.
An investigation of Davis began on Nov. 1, 2009, when state police at Skippack responded to Mercy Suburban Hospital in Norristown to investigate a report of a rape that occurred the night before, according to court papers. At the hospital, police spoke with a 17-year-old girl who alleged that she had been raped by Davis while attending a Halloween party on Oct. 31 at a Mountain Laurel Circle residence in Skippack.
An examination of the girl revealed “scratching and bruising throughout her body” and other injuries consistent with sexual assault, police alleged.
The girl told police she arrived at the party at 10:30 p.m., drank alcohol and socialized with Davis, who was a classmate, according to court documents. Eventually, the girl and Davis left the residence and went to a back yard and kissed, police alleged.
Davis allegedly propositioned the girl for sex and the girl “repeatedly told him no,” Carr alleged in the arrest affidavit. The girl told police that Davis, despite her protests, forcibly sexually assaulted her, according to the arrest affidavit.
While investigating the alleged Oct. 31 sexual assault, police became aware of a second alleged indecent assault involving Davis. A second girl told police Davis assaulted her while she attended a party on a Saturday night in October at a Saddlebrook Road home in Skippack, according to the arrest affidavit.
The girl told authorities that there was alcohol served at the party and she was drinking with several classmates, including Davis. At one point during the party, Davis misplaced his keys and asked he girl to come outside with him to help him look for the keys, police alleged.
While searching for the keys, the girl and Davis kissed briefly, court documents alleged. Davis then led the girl to a secluded area behind some trees, pushed her to the ground and asked her to have sex with him, police alleged. The girl refused and continuously told Davis to get off of her, court documents alleged.
“Davis refused and at one point covered her mouth with his hand,” said Carr, alleging Davis had indecent contact with the girl without her consent.
Court papers do not indicate how old the second girl was at the time of the alleged assault. Authorities also didn’t reveal the name of the school at which Davis and the two girls were classmates.
Teen accused in Arrington shooting to be tried as an adult
Erie Times-News
By LISA THOMPSON
August 17, 2010
Larry Lemon, the 18-year-old accused of gunning down another man in front of a convenience store in January, won't get another chance in the juvenile justice system.
Judge William R. Cunningham has issued an order that rejects a defense request to transfer Lemon's case to Juvenile Court.
In a written opinion, Cunningham said Lemon has been involved with the juvenile justice system for an escalating series of crimes that began with a theft when Lemon was 11 years old and peaked several years later when he assaulted a person with a board in a home and made terroristic threats to others at the present-day Central Career and Technical School.
Cunningham said the courts repeatedly offered Lemon services to address any "educational, substance abuse, mental health, vocational or any other need," yet Lemon wound up accused of shooting Steven Arrington II, just seven months after Lemon was released from his most recent placement in a juvenile detention facility.
"After providing the defendant all of these comprehensive resources, the community has a right to expect that the defendant would not be in possession of a handgun and shooting someone at point-blank range in a parking lot outside a grocery store," Cunningham wrote.
The decision puts Lemon's case closer to trial and a possible life sentence.
Juvenile justice task force notes good, bad, plans future
Youth aid panel still needed to help first offenders; money for improvements is tight.
Times Leader (Wilkes-Barre)
By Mark Guydish
August 18, 2010
WILKES-BARRE – Children no longer go before a judge without an attorney, a new law guarantees restitution to victims of juveniles who had their records expunged and the number of juveniles going into the court system has dropped.
That was some of the good news pointed out by members of the Luzerne County Juvenile Justice Victim Response Task Force at a monthly meeting Tuesday at King’s College.
The bad news: There’s still no youth aid panel to help first offenders avoid court by entering alternate programs, money for more improvements is tight and the county’s first and still only juvenile public defender is already close to case overload.
Nearly 20 months after the county’s juvenile justice scandal broke, about two dozen task force members gathered to review progress and plan the next step out of the quagmire created when former judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan were first accused of accepting millions in exchange for bench actions that benefited a private juvenile facility.
Task force Chairwoman Carol Lavery, a victim advocate for the state, noted a successful effort to get $500,000 in state money set aside to pay restitution to victims of juveniles who will see their records expunged as a result of the scandal. Another $1 million will replace funds cut from the budget for victims of juvenile offenders. The money was transferred from the Crime Victim’s Compensation Fund.
State Sen. Lisa Baker, who sat in on the meeting, warned money is very tight in the state, thanks to the sour economy.
“I’m not sure everything will be addressed between now and the end of Gov. (Ed) Rendell’s term,” Baker, R-Lehman Township, said. “We’re in this for the long haul. This didn’t happen overnight and we need to stay focused and committed.”
Lavery also noted the decision to expunge records had impact on adult cases where a juvenile record was considered in sentencing. “There are a large number of current inmates alleging they have an improper sentence because of these cases,” she said.
Luzerne County Juvenile Court Judge David Lupas and District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll both said the practice of letting juveniles appear before a judge without an attorney – something that happened more than half the time during Ciavarella’s tenure in juvenile court – has ended thanks to new county policies.
But Baker said she still wants to see the policy become state law, something she has proposed in the Senate. “I hope that bill will be considered this fall.”
Current county President Judge Thomas Burke, also at the meeting, noted the number of juveniles appearing before a judge has dropped dramatically thanks to efforts to find alternate ways to resolve cases when children face a first offense. Children and Youth Services Director Frank Castano said his agency had a goal of reducing referrals to court by 20 percent in two years, and exceeded that in 17 months.
But Lavery and others noted the county has made not substantial progress in establishing a juvenile aid panel similar to those in other counties, typically a group of trained community members who meet with offenders, victims and their parents to work out alternative resolutions, further reducing court referrals.
Musto Carroll said the county is “looking at models around the state to determine what would best suit Luzerne County.”
Volunteer advocate Mary Walsh said she had approached the U.S. Department of Justice seeking assistance in getting some initiatives off the ground, seeking help in a “needs assessment” to set priorities for the task force, as well as training to do whatever the assessment recommends, but that such a request must come from a local agency.
The task force debated which agency should take responsibility but made no final decision.
Other suggestions included more outreach to school officials, tapping volunteers from Leadership Wilkes-Barre to assist with projects and holding public forums. Lavery said public forums are tricky because of civil lawsuits pending in the scandal, since some task force members are directly involved in the justice system under scrutiny in the suits.
She also said it’s important to find a way around those concerns and invite public participation in the task force’s work.
Attorney Cheryl Sobeski-Reedy – hired as full-time juvenile public defender after the “Kids for Cash” debacle revealed a lack of resources dedicated to children in the courts – praised the improvements in the system but warned that her work load already exceeds a recommended maximum number of cases.
She urged help in attracting volunteer attorneys and in getting the county to consider hiring a second full-time juvenile attorney.
“We have a goal to establish a separate juvenile defender unit,” she said, with its own secretary, investigator, social worker and space for visiting juvenile clients who now find themselves in waiting rooms with adults who have been charged with a crime.
Lavery cited that dream as an important step in reform.
“Without the vision, we won’t get there.”
DA: Juvenile cases will be evaluated individually
Citizens’ Voice (Wilkes-Barre
By Michael R. Sisak
August 18, 2010
As former Luzerne County Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. prepares for his federal corruption trial next February, a task force of county officials and state advocates is overhauling the juvenile court system he tarnished with a decade of unconstitutional rulings, terse hearings and harsh sentences.
Juveniles no longer appear in court without an attorney. Prosecutors, not court employees in the juvenile probation office, will determine criminal charges. And infractions on school campuses are no longer painted with the same broad brush of "zero tolerance" that guaranteed placement at a juvenile detention facility for even the most minor offenses.
"Every case is going to be looked at individually, and those cases that do come through the system are going to be treated on an individual basis," District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll said Tuesday, after a two-hour meeting with the task force at King's College in Wilkes-Barre.
School administrators reacted coolly to the idea of ending "zero tolerance" last week at a meeting with members of the Juvenile Justice Victim Response Task Force, expressing concern that the policy shift would create an appearance of weakness in their approach to school violence.
Parents entrust schools to keep their children safe and demand action from school administrators when those children are threatened or harmed, state Victim Advocate Carol L. Lavery said.
"If you feel your child has been somehow hurt in the school system, you're demanding that there be no weapons, you're demanding that they swiftly and expediently deal with those issues," Lavery said.
Musto Carroll said the new approach balances the demands for safety and justice, allowing school administrators to resolve minor conflicts in-house while still ensuring a place for the prosecution of more serious campus crimes in the juvenile court system.
"The juvenile criminal justice system is still here and it's working," Musto Carroll said. "It's just that we're not going to take every case because a lot of the cases don't belong in court."
Musto Carroll said shifting the responsibility for evaluating complaints and filing charges to her office has streamlined the court process, allowing prosecutors to weed out minor offenses and those where a paucity of evidence or legal requirements would hinder prosecution.
"We evaluate cases right from the start and determine whether or not there is a legal basis to go forward, rather than sending all of the cases through the system," Musto Carroll said.
Ciavarella toughened his "zero tolerance" policy for juvenile offenders just three days after the opening of a for-profit detention center whose backers allegedly paid him and another judge $2.8 million in kickbacks, according to a former probation official who testified before a state panel last November. The tougher policy required placement at a detention facility for juveniles who missed school or curfew while on probation for another offense, swelling the number of detainees and payments going to the for-profit center, the former probation official, Sandra Brulo, said.
Attorneys who appeared in Ciavarella's courtroom have said local school district officials supported the zero-tolerance policies - instituted on a smaller scale after a 1999 school shooting in Littleton, Colo. - because they enabled them to remove students considered troublemakers.
Ciavarella's successor on the juvenile court bench, Judge David W. Lupas, has required attorneys for all juvenile defendants and the county public defender's office, reversing a long-standing policy, has been providing an attorney for every youth who enters the court system.
Cheryl Sobieski-Reedy, the lone juvenile court public defender, said at the task force meeting Wednesday she meets with juvenile defendants four times a day, three times a week, and has already reached the Juvenile Defenders Association of Pennsylvania's recommended annual caseload limit of 200.
Another full-time juvenile court public defender could be approved for hiring as early as today, when the county Salary Board meets to vote on a slate of new positions that would be funded through the county's mental health/mental retardation program.
Without the additional public defender, Sobieski-Reedy said, the public defender's office would ask judges to appoint outside counsel for juveniles. Some private attorneys have already said they would accept some juvenile cases on a pro bono basis, she said.
Sobieski-Reedy said she eventually hopes to establish a separate juvenile defender unit within the public defender's office, with a social worker, separate secretarial staff and a waiting room that would keep young defendants away from the office's adult clients.
One possible source of funding for juvenile initiatives, the $2.15 million deposited into an escrow account by juvenile detention center developer Robert K. Mericle, is "on hold," pending his sentencing on a charge he withheld information from federal investigators.
Mericle, 47, established the fund as part of a plea agreement he signed last year, but none of the money has been distributed to local children's programs because the developer's case is still unresolved, according to U.S. Attorney's Office spokeswoman Heidi Havens.
Mericle, who is cooperating with federal prosecutors, may be called to testify at Ciavarella's trial on 48 counts, including racketeering, bribery and extortion. Ciavarella's co-defendant, former Judge Michael T. Conahan, pleaded guilty last month to a racketeering conspiracy charge.
"That is what occurs in legal processes," Lavery said, relaying to her fellow task force members the news of the delayed funding. "It is unfortunate, but it is what it is.”
Top Stories - National
Praise for Progress of Arkansas' Juvenile Justice System
KARK-TV (AR)
August 7, 2010
Arkansas' juvenile justice system is getting applause for making strides.
Governor Mike Beebe joined the Departments of Human and Youth Services today, praising the progress since beginning juvenile justice reform two years ago.
He credits the renewed focus on community-based instead of facility-based interventions that offer kids a greater chance for successful and productive lives.
"You provide structure. These after-school and summer programs provide structure, keeping kids off of streets, out of gangs, peer pressure that can cause them all sorts of problems with the juvenile justice system," Beebe said.
“We are finding more and more that the way we have approached juvenile justice in the past simply wasn’t working,” said Pat Arthur, a senior attorney with NCYL. “Having worked in other states, I can tell you that success requires a fundamental shift in thinking by all who affect the future of a child at risk. Clearly from your governor and judges all the way out to your local community providers, you have shown tremendous support for reform in Arkansas.”
“Good after-school programs sustain the progress Arkansas is seeing in education,” Governor Mike Beebe said. “The Boys and Girls Clubs and similar organizations provide positive settings that keep children out of trouble and on the right path for successful and productive lives.”
A community can greatly decrease the likelihood of kids ending up in front of a judge by providing their youth with supervised and structured activities after school, encouraging them to learn new skills, and giving them a place to belong.
“There will always be a need for some kids in crisis to receive intense treatment in a residential program, and that will not change,” said Ron Angel, DYS director. “But it’s clear that for the majority of our youth early intervention in the community where they live is more effective, and costs less to provide.”
At the event, the department unveiled a community-based outreach toolkit funded by a grant from PWF. The materials, entitled “The Truth of Youth,” are designed to educate communities about the needs of kids and also to provide a platform from which future local programs can be launched.
The event also recognized the achievements of one young man who until very recently was on his way down a very different path.
“I can tell you I was in a very dark place clouded by substance abuse,” said Jacob Hudman, a client of South Arkansas Youth Services Center (SAYS). “It has not been an easy road, but now I am proud to say that I am a college student at Southern Arkansas University, working toward a degree in English. Someday I hope to be a college professor. I can honestly say I don’t know where I would be without the support of SAYS.”
“It’s tough when you see kids come in and you know they have so much potential,” said Marion Green, Clinical Coordinator for South Arkansas Youth Services. “You can give them the right tools, but at the end of the day they have to do the real work. Jacob has worked hard and proven that no youth should be counted out.”
Juvenile justice: Schools key to success
The Shreveport Times (LA)
August 8, 2010
Shreveport attorney Clay Walker recently was honored as an outstanding national leader in juvenile justice reform, one of only four people recognized by the National Juvenile Justice Network. Walker is deputy public defender for the state and director of Juvenile Defender Services at the Louisiana Public Defender Board.
Reform efforts in juvenile justice, primarily signaled by a move away from warehouses of incarceration to community-based rehabilitation, have persisted over the past decade despite hurricanes and declining state revenue.
The Times asked Walker, who first worked within the Caddo Parish system before assuming his statewide duties, about the challenges facing juvenile justice.
The Times: Can you first put into perspective for us the size of juvenile justice in Louisiana, how many youths are in the system, for example? What's the typical reason a youth enters the system?
Walker: There are approximately 7,500 open delinquency cases in Louisiana. About 1,100 of those are in Caddo Parish — with 150 new cases a month. Caddo's juvenile defenders are also handling about 400 FINS (Families in Need of Services) cases (ungovernable) and 350 CINC (Child in Need of Care) cases (abuse and neglect).
The typical case, regardless of the charge, is a child who is on the road to dropping out of school and no longer respects his mother's discipline. That's what we are facing — getting children back on track in school and establishing some discipline in the home.
The Times: Let's talk about the successes. What is Louisiana doing right?
Walker: Collaborating. I have been all over the country looking at juvenile justice systems. In Louisiana and, in particular, here in Shreveport, the adults working in the system work well together. The district attorneys, defenders, the sheriff, the probation staff, the mental health community — everyone is at the table. We argue in court; but outside of the courtroom, we are working together and we are closer to a solution because of that collaboration.
The Times: What is the most pressing problem from a public defender standpoint?
Walker: Too many cases. If a child is acting out in school because he can't read, we need time to figure that out and advocate for the child. If we can get him back on track — if we can teach him to read, he won't be back in the system. If we don't teach him to read, he will, more than likely, matriculate to the adult system. But defenders need time to find the underlying problem. If you have too many cases, there is not enough time and the child just slips through the cracks.
The Times: Regarding the entirety of juvenile justice, where would you pour additional resources if it was yours to do?
Walker: The school system. We need more early education programs, and the teachers need more support. If a child is acting out in class or is beginning to show signs of failure, the teacher needs help. Teachers don't have the time needed for one-on-one intervention when they have 25 other kids to teach. Of course, we need more community programs to help the kids already in the system. But if you really want to fix the problem, the answer is in early education.
The Times: While serving primarily in Caddo Parish, you had particular concerns about the numbers of school students being routed to the juvenile system. What is the current reality?
Walker: From my perspective, not much has changed. Teachers are being asked to fix all sorts of societal problems in addition to teaching. Like defenders, teachers are overworked and underpaid. Unfortunately, they either quit teaching or they cope by pushing the troubled kids into the juvenile justice system. It's understandable because teachers are not there to fix all the problems; they are there to teach.
But by the time the child gets to the justice system, he is a good bit older, which makes it more difficult to turn him around. The school system has the access and knowledge of the child's needs long before they have contact with the justice system. We need to find a way to help the teachers when the children are younger.
The Times: What is the biggest myth or misconception among decision makers and/or the public at large hampering juvenile justice reform?
Walker: Too many people blame the parents. I have seen many parents, mostly single moms, who are working two jobs and doing their best. Just like you and me, they love their kids. But they can't supervise them as much as they need to because of work, and they are losing their boys to the streets.
Don't get me wrong, I've also seen some parents who don't put their kids first. But if we blame them, then we push them away and we all lose. If we try to understand them, we have a fighting chance of installing some positive changes.
Letters: Kids Tried As Juveniles Are Less Likely To Repeat Crimes
Hartford Courant (CT)
August 9, 2010
A letter writer asserted that the "statewide cause of safer teen driving will be better served" if the law requires the young driver charged in a January school bus crash to be tried as an adult [Aug. 4, "Teen's Trial Shouldn't Be Moved"].
This was a tragic incident, and the person responsible must certainly be held accountable. But keeping the case in adult court ignores several key factors.
Kids tried as juveniles are less likely to repeat their crimes because sentences require them to address the root causes of their behavior. As Rep. Michael Lawlor said, young people often face more severe consequences — including longer sentences — when they are tried in juvenile court [CTNow, Aug. 3, "Lawyer: Move Case To Lower Court"].
The reason we have separate juvenile and adult justice systems is that we know kids are different. They are still developing and much more amenable to rehabilitation. The juvenile system mandates that kids participate in schooling, drug and alcohol programs or whatever other measures the court deems necessary to make sure they don't repeat their behavior. The adult system rarely requires this much.
Ultimately, a judge will decide whether the teen in this case can benefit from the juvenile justice system and whether society will in turn benefit. That's exactly as it should be.
Abby Anderson, executive director, Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance, Bridgeport
Experts want less jail, more treatment for errant Georgia juveniles
One proposal suggests decriminalization of truancy, drinking.
The Florida Times-Union
By Walter C. Jones
August 9, 2010
ATLANTA - A parade of judges, prosecutors and children's advocates told a Senate subcommittee Monday that the state needs to revise the law on juveniles to shift from putting mild cases behind bars to putting their entire families in treatment.
The challenge is coming up with the money to do it.
No one speaking before the subcommittee objected to what several described as "decriminalizing" so-called status offenders. Those are children who break laws they are subject to only because of their status as minors. Those laws include truancy, underage drinking, running away from home and being unruly.
A group of law students and advocacy groups spent two years drafting a revision to the juvenile laws in 2008 that includes the decriminalization. The group has been trying ever since to get the legislature to pass the revisions. The subcommittee is reviewing it section by section ahead of next year's legislative session, and Monday's two-hour meeting dealt with status offenders.
The advocates' proposal is to require a meeting within 24 hours of a child's arrest with case workers from multiple agencies who would offer counseling to the entire family as an alternative to locking up the child with more serious delinquents. The meetings would be held before the case is tried.
Research shows status offenders are more likely to wind up in trouble again if they are locked up, according to Rob Rosenbloom, deputy commissioner of juvenile justice. However, the facilities run by the Department of Juvenile Justice are geared toward public safety rather than counseling, so it's not possible to keep the children separate from the serious troublemakers.
The authors of the revision proposal recommend having social workers from the Department of Family and Children's Services manage the cases of status offenders in coordination with other government and private agencies. But Bobby Cagle, director of legislative affairs with DFACS, said the agency isn't geared for it, focusing now on policing child abuse and neglect.
Taking on the additional responsibility means additional staff and training.
"All of this entails a great deal of staff time. When you're talking about staff time, you're talking about money," he said.
Money isn't the only hurdle.
The juvenile judge in Georgia that all advocates say has already done the most to order such counseling meetings is Peggy Walker of Douglas County. Since 1998, she's taken advantage of a provision in the current law that allows judges to hold such meetings before trying a child's case.
"It is a huge battle to bring the stakeholders all together," she said. And when they do all intervene in the same case, they frequently give conflicting instructions to the families.
The chairman of the subcommittee, Sen. Bill Hamrick, R-Carrollton, asked agency staffers to develop specific estimates of the cost to requiring the counseling meetings. He said the subcommittee's next session would be announced later.
Youth facility most overcrowded: Group
The Washington Post – Online
August 10, 2010
The Cheltenham Youth Facility was the most overcrowded of Maryland's largest secure detention centers between April and July, the state's juvenile justice watchdog says in a new report.
The Prince George's County facility has been under added scrutiny by some Maryland lawmakers after the February slaying of a 65-year-old employee, whose body was found outside a campus building. A 14-year-old boy has been charged as a juvenile in the killing.
The Maryland Juvenile Justice Monitoring Unit does not mention Hannah Wheeling's death.
However, the report cites research showing that crowded conditions in correctional facilities can increase stress and violence, and it mentions two separate group disturbances in June.
The monitor said that while the Department of Juvenile Services has taken steps to successfully reduce population at its three most crowded facilities, Cheltenham still was over its capacity every day of the second quarter reporting period.
“The population there was reduced from an average of 115 youth in June to 105 youth on July 14,” the monitor wrote in its August report. “With an actual capacity of 85, Cheltenham remains significantly overcrowded, but the population decrease has improved staffing shortages.”
The monitor points out that the facility's population rose to as high as 131 youths.
In its response, the Department of Juvenile Services said that while some department facilities had recent population increases, none had chronic and severe overcrowding or any negative effects caused by overpopulation.
“The facility maintained appropriate staffing ratios to ensure adequate supervision of youth, including throughout temporary periods of population increase,” the department said in its response.
The department also said the two group disturbances cited in the report were not caused by a temporary population increase. One of them happened during a basketball game.
“The facility was within required staffing ratio — there were sufficient staff supervising the youth,” the department said.
The monitor reported that the Noyes Detention Center in Montgomery County was above its population capacity for boys on 90 percent of the days in the second quarter.
The Charles H. Hickey School in Baltimore County was over capacity 41 percent of the quarter. The report noted that the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center did not exceed its capacity for 120 youths on most days during the quarter, but 40 youths were housed in detention centers around the state, contributing to overcrowding problems in other facilities.
Federal monitoring of long-troubled city youth lockup to end
Justice Department has kept tabs since May 2007
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
By Julie Bykowicz
August 11, 2010
Federal monitoring of the long-troubled Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center is likely to end soon, state juvenile services officials said Wednesday, making it the third youth facility in Maryland to be lifted from such oversight in little more than two years.
The officials said a U.S. Department of Justice monitor has told them the city facility appears to be in "substantial compliance" with an oversight plan laid out in May 2007. Federal officials sought to make the facility safer by improving suicide prevention programs, education and behavior management, said Jay Cleary, a spokesman for the state Department of Juvenile Services.
The justice center can hold up to 144 teenage boys, most of whom are awaiting trial in juvenile court or placement in a long-term program ordered by a judge. To alleviate crowded conditions, Juvenile Services Secretary Donald W. DeVore reduced to 120 the maximum number of detainees allowed at any one time.
The $50 million facility on Gay Street, which also contains juvenile courtrooms and agency offices, opened in 2003, but its detention wing was quickly overcome with problems, including brutal fights and assaults on staff members.
A few months after taking office in 2007, Gov. Martin O'Malley voluntarily entered the city youth lockup into an oversight agreement with the Justice Department. At the time, two other state juvenile facilities, the Charles H. Hickey Jr. School in Baltimore County and the Cheltenham Youth Facility in Prince George's County, also were under federal monitoring for substandard conditions.
Federal oversight of Hickey and Cheltenham ended in June 2008, and state Juvenile Services officials predicted the city facility could be out of its agreement within a few months. After both the Justice Department and state agency sign off on final exit papers, a federal judge must agree to end the case, Cleary said.
"This is very monumental for us," Cleary said. "It's the first time in at least five years that no state juvenile facility will be federally monitored."
But Cleary said, "it's not just about getting out of federal oversight for the sake of getting out of federal oversight. It's about real improvements in the way facilities are treating youth and taking care of youth."
O'Malley, who plans to announce the development with DeVore Thursday at the facility, said in a statement that "there is nothing more important in our state than protecting Maryland's most vulnerable children and their families."
Committee focusing on minority contact disparity
Columbus Telegram (NE)
By Adrian Sanchez
August 13, 2010
COLUMBUS — A disproportionate number of “minority contacts” within Platte County’s juvenile justice system has prompted one group to reach out to the Hispanic community to help curb the problem.
The Platte County Disproportionate Minority Youth Contact Committee is encouraging Hispanic residents to attend its next meeting, scheduled for 6 p.m. Monday, Aug. 23, at Federated Church, 2704 15th St.
The meeting announcement was made during the Thursday meeting of the Columbus Multicultural Alliance (CMA) to help spread the word and increase attendance.
According to a letter by Platte County Attorney Carl Hart, who serves as head of the committee, the meeting is an effort to reach out to Hispanic community members to help the committee analyze why there “exists a disproportionate (number of) minority contacts within Platte County’s juvenile justice system.”
During the CMA meeting, Platte Valley Diversion Program/Juvenile Services Administrator Wilma Arp said Platte County is one of 14 counties with disproportionate minority representation in the state’s youth development centers.
“We want to take a look at why this is happening,” Arp said. Many of the youth are sent to Madison, Kearney or Geneva stemming from probation or parole violations and failure to appear in court and not major crimes, according to data collected.
“We want the minority population to help us answer some of these questions,” Arp said.
Bob Arp, CMA member, said many of the issues that may need to be addressed are things that continue to be tackled by the CMA.
“It may do with cultural issues, trust issues,” he said, but the goal is the same, “to reduce that number. This is a working session to try to understand what is going on.”
O'Brien: Life without parole is wrong penalty for juveniles
Children who commit crimes deserve a chance
Lansing State Journal (MI)
August 15, 2010
Did you know that if a juvenile is found guilty as an adult in Michigan the current mandatory sentence is life in prison without parole?
The passage of House Bill 4594 would give courts discretion to place youth on probation, to sentence them to rehabilitative services, or to impose a sentence as an adult. It would also abolish the sentence of life without parole (LWOP) for juveniles. HB 4594 would not release any prisoners; rather it would ensure the opportunity for inmates to present their case to the parole board and possibly earn a second chance at life.
The U.S. currently has more than 2,500 people serving LWOP for crimes committed as a minor. Michigan has the second highest percentage among all of the states with 346 juveniles serving LWOP. International standards prohibit the sentence of life without parole. In fact, all countries except for the U.S. and Somalia have ratified the Convention of the Rights of the Child which prohibits a sentence of life without parole.
Youth are fundamentally different from adults in many ways. Research on brain development suggests that brains continue to develop into the early twenties and as a result teens are incapable of thinking like adults. Youth do not have adult levels of judgment, impulse control, or the ability to assess risks.
Placing children in adult prisons can cause both physical and psychological harm for the child. Most prisons are filled with predators, rapists and murderers. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, the sexual assault of a teen in an adult facility is five times more likely and teens are also two times more likely to be beaten by staff. In addition, the teen suicide rate in adult prisons is eight times that of teens in juvenile detention.
Michigan is currently struggling with a $1.5 billion deficit and the prison uses approximately 20 percent of the budget. It costs roughly $30,000 per year to house an inmate in state prison. It would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars over the next several decades to pay for the sentence of life without parole.
The juvenile justice system has had some major changes within the last five years. For example, in 2005 the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles could not be executed. Also, on May 17, 2010 the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to sentence juveniles to LWOP if they did not commit a murder.
I urge you to support HB 4594 by contacting your local representatives. Please discuss this issue with your friends and family and ask them to also support this bill. LWOP sentences are inherently cruel in denying a child any possibility of reform.
Punish the behaviors, not the child, and allow them to earn a second chance at living.
Editorial: Deterring youth crime
Our view: The long-term challenges for the juvenile justice system go far beyond the lifting of federal oversight at the city's troubled youth detention center
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
August 16, 2010
It's certainly welcome news that conditions in the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center have improved enough to persuade the U.S. Department of Justice to lift federal oversight of the youth lockup it has held under scrutiny since 2007. But just because the facility has been found to be "in substantial compliance" with minimum federal standards doesn't mean officials there won't continue to face huge challenges dealing with the city's most troubled youths.
The center, which opened in 2003, was originally intended to house up to 144 youths, most of whom were either awaiting trial in the juvenile court system or long-term placement in a rehabilitation program. It was touted as a model facility that allowed officials to protect youthful defendants accused of serious crimes by holding them separately from hardened adult criminals.
But by 2007, when the state voluntarily agreed to allow federal monitoring of the facility, the center had witnessed a wave of violent incidents, including brutal fights among inmates and assaults on staff members. Among the safety improvements sought by federal monitors were more-effective education and behavior management programs and a suicide-prevention initiative targeting vulnerable youths. And though the center was never intended to serve as a treatment facility, it also became apparent that many of the young people there needed some form of psychological or emotional counseling to get their lives back on track.
The lifting of federal oversight shows that state officials have made some progress in addressing those needs, but it's important to keep the extent of those advances in perspective. Conditions at the center may no longer be so terrible that they require federal oversight, but that's a very low standard. What's needed are programs that help troubled youngsters turn their lives around before they commit the kind of serious crimes likely to land them in the adult court system.
The need is particularly urgent for the violent repeat offenders who fall through the cracks of the current juvenile justice system because they are too young to be treated as adults, yet too dangerous to be on the streets.
That dilemma was highlighted last year by the case of Lamont Davis, a Baltimore teen who critically injured a 5-year-old girl with a stray bullet while shooting at another teen. At the time, Mr. Davis was already under Department of Juvenile Services supervision and awaiting trial on another charge in juvenile court.
Maryland is planning to build a new $100 million detention facility in Baltimore to house youths charged as adults. But there would be less need for such a costly facility if there were more effective intervention programs at youth lockups like the Juvenile Justice Center. Ultimately, the success of any youth detention facility should be judged not by when the Justice Department declares conditions there are no longer intolerable, but by how well it deters troubled youngsters from the self-destructive behaviors that lead them into a life of crime.
Youth detention shift
State lockups giving way to nabe centers and programs
New York Daily News
By Henry Wu, Jasmine Pendelton, Rachael Schwartz, AND Sydney Fusto
CHILDREN'S PRESSLINE
August 18, 2010
Twenty years ago, Alex Mejia spent two years as a teenage inmate at Bridges Juvenile Center on charges of drug possession, robbery and auto theft. He had turned to the streets as a way to try and ease the burden on his mother after his father left.
“All you saw were its brick walls, steel bars, dirty toilet,” Mejia said of Bridges. “That’s the time I remember.”
But this fall, the old large cement Mott Haven building crowned with barbed wire and security cameras will shut its doors for good.
“It’s time for a change,” said Mejia, now 34 and a father of four. “It’s been there for a very long time”
After Bridges closes, the approximately 130 young inmates now held there will be moved to either the Horizons or Crossroads juvenile centers, in Brooklyn or the Bronx. Both centers, built in 1998, have modern facilities and open bed space.
Officials from the city’s Juvenile Justice Department and the Administration for Child Services, which merged in the start of 2010, said that consolidating all youths awaiting case resolution into the two facilities would allow the city to focus on creating more alternatives to detention programs that keep kids in the community.
“What our kids will get is this therapeutic service and they get probation supervision,” said Leslie Abbey, Executive Director of New York City’s Children’s Services Juvenile Justice Initiative.
According to the New York State Office of Children & Family Services, the closure of Bridges reflects a statewide trend of replacing secure detention centers with home-based and non-secure detention centers.
Since 2004, the state’s nine secured detention programs have reduced their beds from 613 to 521.
The newer community-based programs allow youth to remain in their communities while serving time.
They’re also budget-friendly, costing $17,000 a year compared to the secured state-run facilities that cost $200,000 a year.
The goal of the CSA and DJJ is to reduce the stream of youth who are sent to the state’s 26 detention facilities, most of which are upstate. As of July 26, these facilities, held 679 youth who committed a crime under 16.
So far, the newer community-based programs, which serve around 380 youth annually, are doing the job. Recidivism rates can be as low as 25 percent, according to ACS. But at juvenile prisons, the rate is much higher-- three-quarters of youth are arrested within three years of release from a detention center.
According to Elizabeth Gordon, a youth counselor at Bridges and former inmate, the community-based programs, are more effective because of their greater flexibility for dealing with youth whose crimes can be the product of unaddressed trauma.
“We need more programs, more after school programs to help out these kids,” Gordon said. “A lot of these kids who were victims of incest, molestation, and being violated, didn’t have the help at home. That’s why they turn to crime and gangs instead of reaching for their parents.”
However, residents around Bridges claim its presence in the neighborhood keeps youth in check.
“Even though it’s a detention center, and yes it is in the neighborhood, it’s still letting the kids know that if I commit a crime, this is where I am going to end up being,” said Gordon.
Jah’sway Robinson, 16, a resident of the South Bronx, thinks the detention center is important for teaching kids discipline.
“They need a place to learn what’s right and how to be better in the community,” she said.
Additional reporting by James Norwood, Raunak Amanna, Shavagne Walcott, Shawanda Walcott, Shenell Renwick, Liana Felice, Dejania Cotton-Samuel, Dakota London, Amy Xiong, Genva Ansley-Cornick, Felipe Poblete, Annabel Estrella, and Talika Blair
Opinion: Rethink how we punish juveniles
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (GA)
By Luis A. Velez
August 18, 2010
The desire for revenge that clouds our judgment in dealing with juvenile offenders must end.
The original juvenile justice system was based on a rehabilitative model that offered treatment to young offenders. But rehabilitation was replaced by retribution in the 1990s as a result of a staggering increase in juvenile crime.
Legislators passed draconian laws that transferred youth to adult criminal court if they committed certain offenses, so that juvenile offenders would face long sentences in the adult system.
But the spike in crime was short-lived. Juvenile crime rates returned to normal levels in 1995 and generally have dropped since then. Nonetheless, by 2006 every state had passed a juvenile transfer law.
Georgia’s contribution to the cause was The Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1994, known as SB 440. It gave the superior (adult) court exclusive jurisdiction over the trial of any child 13 to 17 years of age alleged to have committed specified offenses, including murder and rape. These offenses became known as the “seven deadly sins.” SB 440 was a direct response to the public cry for tougher sanctions against violent juvenile criminals. It also reflected the growing perception that juvenile court, with its focus on treatment and rehabilitation, was too lenient on young offenders.
Proponents of SB 440 argued that its two primary goals were deterrence and retribution, and both would be better accomplished in the superior court, where longer sentences would send the “right message” to current and potential youthful offenders. But national academicians, including Dr. Edwin Risler at the University of Georgia, tested this hypothesis and found that juvenile transfer policies did not work.
Researchers found that trying juveniles as adults contributed to higher recidivism rates among juveniles who were transferred to the adult criminal justice system in comparison to similar youth who were retained in the juvenile system.
In one Florida study involving 950 juveniles, 144 youth as well as juvenile and adult correction staff members were interviewed. Their candid comments help explain why juveniles fare poorly in the adult system and are more likely to commit crimes after leaving it.
Juveniles in adult facilities reported far more humiliation and the fear of brutalization in comparison to those in juvenile facilities. Adult institution staff reported that juveniles were more immature and susceptible to antisocial influences of leaders. Officials also reported that juveniles were at greater risk of being beaten and sexually victimized by older inmates. Thus, youth in the adult system are more likely to be brutalized by, and learn from, hardened criminals than if they stay in the juvenile system.
State Sen. Bill Hamrick, R-Carrollton, recently proposed SB 292, which offers needed reforms to Georgia’s juvenile justice system. If enacted, the law would keep arrested youth from adults and keep juveniles whose case has been transferred to adult court housed in juvenile, rather than adult, facilities until the youth turns 17.
SB 292 is a step in the right direction. But it retains the SB 440 provision in which juveniles, ages 13-17, are automatically transferred to the jurisdiction of the superior court if they commit any of the seven deadly sins. Only time will tell if a better solution would be to have juvenile court judges, who know youth best, retain jurisdiction over all juvenile cases and transfer to adult court those youth who are not amenable to treatment.
Luis A. Velez, a Georgia State University law graduate, has worked at the New York City Department of Juvenile Justice, NYC Criminal Justice Agency and New York County District Attorney’s Office.
Editorial: Second chance for young lifers
Ventura County Star (CA)
August 18, 2010
We support legislation that allows for the review of cases involving juveniles sentenced to life without parole after 10 years, potentially allowing some of them to receive a new sentence of 25 years to life.
It is both a rational and humane approach to juvenile sentencing.
Senate Bill 399 recognizes, as does The Star, that minors are different from adults in that there is a far greater chance of rehabilitating juveniles. A fact not only recognized by child experts, doctors and science, but also by this country’s juvenile-justice system with its sentencing guidelines and rules that differ significantly from the adult system.
SB 399, The Fair Sentencing for Youth Act, authored by state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, works this way: Specific criteria established under the law would be used by the courts to determine if a juvenile offender who has served 10 years of a sentence of life without parole qualifies for resentencing.
Any new sentence only makes the inmate eligible for parole after he or she has served 25 years behind bars.
It’s a far cry from giving juveniles who commit serious crimes a get-out-of-jail-free card. Serving 25 years in a harsh prison environment is severe punishment in anybody’s book.
There are more than 270 inmates in California prisons serving life-without-parole sentences for crimes they committed at ages as young as 14.
We believe SB 399 will offer hope to some of these juveniles facing what amounts to a death sentence by giving them a reason to reform and to become a productive member of a community.
There is also a monetary benefit to SB 399. According to Sen. Yee, keeping the current population of youth offenders already sentenced to life without parole until their deaths in prison will cost the state approximately $500 million. Each new youth offender given this sentence will cost the state upward of $2.5 million.
The genesis behind Sen. Yee’s bill is the case of a Riverside girl who was 16 when she killed the man who sexually abused her and lured her into prostitution. She was sentenced to life without parole, despite a psychiatric evaluation determining that rehabilitation was possible. She is now 31 years old.
SB 399 passed out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee earlier this week and the full Assembly is expected to debate it today. We urge lawmakers to approve this bill and send it to the governor.
Letters: Social programs only part of juvenile justice solution
The Baltimore Sun (MD)
August 20, 2010
I found Sonia Kumar's letter ("Improving Juvenile Justice," Readers Respond, Aug. 18) to be very interesting, but very one-sided in believing that more programs will improve a juvenile's situation. In part this is true, but I believe that a major part of the problem is the lack of facilities, as there are those children that do need to be removed from society, to protect other children and society.
Also, the court must not only look at the individual youth on a particular offense, but the total situation and how their behavior fits into the total picture. It isn't fair to be lightheartedly lenient when the entire family is affected. I agree, the way any authority handles things is abysmal and results in a total failure and graduation to the adult system.
First, with the preponderance of guidelines, sometimes conflicting, authorities have no way dealing with out-of-control juveniles, which makes them both conflicted and frustrated, oftentimes taking it out on the juvenile's parents[s]. Juveniles are not dealt with their transgressions in a timely fashion, which not only racks up the offenses, it results in an increasingly out of control youth. At times, dangerous offenders feel that they can get away anything they want to. Often, serious offenses are allowed to rack up without either judgment or aid for the child.
Another facet that would improve juvenile justice is more diligence in investigating those who aid the juvenile in their activities, such as adults who provide transportation and housing so they can run away; or adults who supply drugs. If police are able to put more of those people behind bars, it will be harder for the offenders to do the activities that get them in trouble in the first place.
Regardless, most juveniles deserve to be punished or detained for what they have done. It's part of the punishment/rewards that guide most of our lives and thought processes. In my experience as both a father and with friends who worked at juvenile services, I realize that one can only point offenders in the right direction for their future, but it is the individual juvenile who decides enough is enough and strives for a higher quality of life. That is where the programs of development come into play. Every part of the system, must be dedicated to realistically changing that individual's mindset.
In total, whether police, the government responsible for handling offenders or private organizations, the area of juvenile care (outside the family) is irresponsibly underfunded and thought out, with no foresight for either community safety or the juvenile's best interest, as neither seem to be cared about.
Michael W. Kohlman, Baltimore
[pic][pic][pic]
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- supreme council of education qatar
- security council of russia
- examination council of zambia grade 9 papers
- examinations council of zambia results
- examination council of zambia 2019
- history of chief petty officer
- council of aging
- international council of nurses ebp
- council of institutional investors
- national council of state boards of nursing
- judicial council of california careers
- council of ministers india