Reply to comment | California Progress Report
"As California and the nation continue to struggle with budget crises, creative and cost-effective approaches in the provision of services for high-needs youthful offender populations are becoming increasingly necessary.
Leaders in California, Georgia and New York have recently called for reform or “realignment” of their out-of-date state-run juvenile justice systems. While the urgency for reform in many states is a result of strained state budgets, it serves as an opportunity to engage juvenile justice stakeholders to restructure their juvenile justice systems in a more efficient and effective manner.
One population to pay particular attention to when planning for juvenile justice realignment is the disproportionate number of youth with mental health needs in juvenile facilities, known as the “crossover caseload.”
These highest-needs youth have historically been neglected during times of reform, when in fact they are the youth most in need of quality, individualized care. As a result of 1980s mental health system reform, juvenile justice systems, in effect, replaced public psychiatric hospitals in the care of mentally ill youth; despite the fact that the juvenile justice system lacks the resources to provide adequate services for this population.
Although rates of juvenile incarceration have been declining, a disproportionate number of youth in this crossover caseload are still being confined, between 50-70 percent nationally and 42 percent in California, according to conservative estimates.
Resource-strained counties in California have continued to institutionalize this crossover caseload because their probation departments do not have sufficient expertise or resources for creative alternative services, such as community supervision and therapy. However, access to treatment in state-run facilities is arguably worse.
Currently California’s Division of Juvenile Facilities has very limited bed space for youth in need of intensive mental health treatment. Roughly 13 percent of all DJF beds are designated for youth with mental health needs, while 75 percent of youths at intake have serious mental health diagnoses."
Friday, February 17, 2012
Reply to comment | California Progress Report
Reply to comment | California Progress Report
"As California and the nation continue to struggle with budget crises, creative and cost-effective approaches in the provision of services for high-needs youthful offender populations are becoming increasingly necessary.
Leaders in California, Georgia and New York have recently called for reform or “realignment” of their out-of-date state-run juvenile justice systems. While the urgency for reform in many states is a result of strained state budgets, it serves as an opportunity to engage juvenile justice stakeholders to restructure their juvenile justice systems in a more efficient and effective manner.
One population to pay particular attention to when planning for juvenile justice realignment is the disproportionate number of youth with mental health needs in juvenile facilities, known as the “crossover caseload.”
These highest-needs youth have historically been neglected during times of reform, when in fact they are the youth most in need of quality, individualized care. As a result of 1980s mental health system reform, juvenile justice systems, in effect, replaced public psychiatric hospitals in the care of mentally ill youth; despite the fact that the juvenile justice system lacks the resources to provide adequate services for this population.
Although rates of juvenile incarceration have been declining, a disproportionate number of youth in this crossover caseload are still being confined, between 50-70 percent nationally and 42 percent in California, according to conservative estimates.
Resource-strained counties in California have continued to institutionalize this crossover caseload because their probation departments do not have sufficient expertise or resources for creative alternative services, such as community supervision and therapy. However, access to treatment in state-run facilities is arguably worse.
Currently California’s Division of Juvenile Facilities has very limited bed space for youth in need of intensive mental health treatment. Roughly 13 percent of all DJF beds are designated for youth with mental health needs, while 75 percent of youths at intake have serious mental health diagnoses."
"As California and the nation continue to struggle with budget crises, creative and cost-effective approaches in the provision of services for high-needs youthful offender populations are becoming increasingly necessary.
Leaders in California, Georgia and New York have recently called for reform or “realignment” of their out-of-date state-run juvenile justice systems. While the urgency for reform in many states is a result of strained state budgets, it serves as an opportunity to engage juvenile justice stakeholders to restructure their juvenile justice systems in a more efficient and effective manner.
One population to pay particular attention to when planning for juvenile justice realignment is the disproportionate number of youth with mental health needs in juvenile facilities, known as the “crossover caseload.”
These highest-needs youth have historically been neglected during times of reform, when in fact they are the youth most in need of quality, individualized care. As a result of 1980s mental health system reform, juvenile justice systems, in effect, replaced public psychiatric hospitals in the care of mentally ill youth; despite the fact that the juvenile justice system lacks the resources to provide adequate services for this population.
Although rates of juvenile incarceration have been declining, a disproportionate number of youth in this crossover caseload are still being confined, between 50-70 percent nationally and 42 percent in California, according to conservative estimates.
Resource-strained counties in California have continued to institutionalize this crossover caseload because their probation departments do not have sufficient expertise or resources for creative alternative services, such as community supervision and therapy. However, access to treatment in state-run facilities is arguably worse.
Currently California’s Division of Juvenile Facilities has very limited bed space for youth in need of intensive mental health treatment. Roughly 13 percent of all DJF beds are designated for youth with mental health needs, while 75 percent of youths at intake have serious mental health diagnoses."
Thursday, February 16, 2012
REGION: Local ACLU creates criminal justice watchdog job
REGION: Local ACLU creates criminal justice watchdog job
"In the face of sweeping changes to the way the state houses prisoners, the American Civil Liberties Union has hired watchdogs to keep an eye on how those changes are implemented, a local ACLU leader said last week.
To that end, the San Diego and Imperial counties chapter of the ACLU recently hired North County native Margaret Dooley-Sammuli to review criminal justice and drug policies related to "realignment," which is what the state has dubbed the massive changes that went into effect last fall.
Under realignment, certain inmates serving time for felonies will stay in county jails instead of getting shipped off to state prison. The sentences for the inmates don't change; only their housing does.
Many people, including criminal justice scholars and the county's law enforcement leaders, have hailed realignment as a chance to not only overhaul rehabilitation of prisoners, but also to implement more effective practices to cut down on recidivism and give convicted criminals a chance to successfully reintegrate into society.
In a state where 70 percent of its parolees landed back behind bars within three years, better reintegration into society translates into improved public safety, said Kevin Keenan, executive director of the local ACLU chapter.
Keenan said the decision to create watchdog jobs like Dooley-Sammuli's "is about the best possible public safety outcome for all people."
"We have a chance to make things better in this moment, and we should all be focused on doing things sensibly," Keenan said.
Under realignment, the county has said it expects to see an extra 2,000 convicted criminals in local jails each year, inmates who would have otherwise gone to state prisons.
"At the local level, what I will be doing is watching the (local) implementation of realignment and working with public safety agencies to bring our concerns and recommendations," Dooley-Sammuli said. "We'd like to support a good implementation of realignment.
"Exactly how and what role the ACLU plays will sort of depend on what the county is doing to implement realignment," she said."
Read more: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/region-local-aclu-creates-criminal-justice-watchdog-job/article_b230f2a3-b2fb-5b5d-8494-bd1594024329.html#ixzz1mZLMC41N
"In the face of sweeping changes to the way the state houses prisoners, the American Civil Liberties Union has hired watchdogs to keep an eye on how those changes are implemented, a local ACLU leader said last week.
To that end, the San Diego and Imperial counties chapter of the ACLU recently hired North County native Margaret Dooley-Sammuli to review criminal justice and drug policies related to "realignment," which is what the state has dubbed the massive changes that went into effect last fall.
Under realignment, certain inmates serving time for felonies will stay in county jails instead of getting shipped off to state prison. The sentences for the inmates don't change; only their housing does.
Many people, including criminal justice scholars and the county's law enforcement leaders, have hailed realignment as a chance to not only overhaul rehabilitation of prisoners, but also to implement more effective practices to cut down on recidivism and give convicted criminals a chance to successfully reintegrate into society.
In a state where 70 percent of its parolees landed back behind bars within three years, better reintegration into society translates into improved public safety, said Kevin Keenan, executive director of the local ACLU chapter.
Keenan said the decision to create watchdog jobs like Dooley-Sammuli's "is about the best possible public safety outcome for all people."
"We have a chance to make things better in this moment, and we should all be focused on doing things sensibly," Keenan said.
Under realignment, the county has said it expects to see an extra 2,000 convicted criminals in local jails each year, inmates who would have otherwise gone to state prisons.
"At the local level, what I will be doing is watching the (local) implementation of realignment and working with public safety agencies to bring our concerns and recommendations," Dooley-Sammuli said. "We'd like to support a good implementation of realignment.
"Exactly how and what role the ACLU plays will sort of depend on what the county is doing to implement realignment," she said."
Read more: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/region-local-aclu-creates-criminal-justice-watchdog-job/article_b230f2a3-b2fb-5b5d-8494-bd1594024329.html#ixzz1mZLMC41N
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
'This is the model that forensic science should be'
'This is the model that forensic science should be'
"AFTER YEARS of working in the public and private sectors of forensic science, Arthur Young, a forensic-biology specialist, realized that neither system was working.
"We were sitting around saying no matter how you cut this pie, it's always bad," he said. "We thought maybe the solution was a different cut of the pie."
So, in 2010, Young and his partners founded Guardian Forensics, a small lab in Abington that operates as a nonprofit agency.
"We realized forensic science, which exists at the boundary of science and the law, that politics was being added into the equation, as if things weren't hard enough already," Young said.
Guardian Forensics serves defense attorneys, police agencies and private citizens. The work is done for less than at most private labs, Young said, and, sometimes, he even takes a loss.
Last year, residents in Chester were irate when a cop fatally shot Daniel Simms. The cops needed to prove that a gun found at the scene had been in Simms' hands. Young processed the DNA for free because he didn't want the residents to think that he might be biased.
"Simply because, if you were the family of Daniel Simms and the results come back that your relative had the gun, well, you're going to say this guy was paid to get the results they wanted," Young said."
"AFTER YEARS of working in the public and private sectors of forensic science, Arthur Young, a forensic-biology specialist, realized that neither system was working.
"We were sitting around saying no matter how you cut this pie, it's always bad," he said. "We thought maybe the solution was a different cut of the pie."
So, in 2010, Young and his partners founded Guardian Forensics, a small lab in Abington that operates as a nonprofit agency.
"We realized forensic science, which exists at the boundary of science and the law, that politics was being added into the equation, as if things weren't hard enough already," Young said.
Guardian Forensics serves defense attorneys, police agencies and private citizens. The work is done for less than at most private labs, Young said, and, sometimes, he even takes a loss.
Last year, residents in Chester were irate when a cop fatally shot Daniel Simms. The cops needed to prove that a gun found at the scene had been in Simms' hands. Young processed the DNA for free because he didn't want the residents to think that he might be biased.
"Simply because, if you were the family of Daniel Simms and the results come back that your relative had the gun, well, you're going to say this guy was paid to get the results they wanted," Young said."
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
FayObserver.com - Racial Justice Act hearing: Political scientist says juror ideology, not racism, can explain study's results
FayObserver.com - Racial Justice Act hearing: Political scientist says juror ideology, not racism, can explain study's results
"A political scientist testified at the Robinson Racial Justice Act hearing Monday that juror ideology, not racism, can explain the results of a statistical study that said local and North Carolina prosecutors have dismissed black jurors more frequently than whites from capital murder trials.
Polls repeatedly have found that black Americans are likely to be politically liberal, oppose the death penalty and mistrust the criminal justice system more than whites and other racial groups, said Christopher Cronin of the Methodist University political science department, in testimony for the prosecution.
There has been previous prosecution testimony that black jurors cited in the statistical study were peremptorily dismissed not because of their race, but because they expressed reservations about the death penalty, had criminal records or other factors that made them undesirable to the prosecution.
Lawyers for defendant Marcus Reymond Robinson contend that the stated reasons are nothing more than a pretense attempting to hide an underlying racism.
Robinson, who is black, is on death row for the 1991 murder of Erik Tornblom, who was white. Now Robinson is attempting to use the Racial Justice Act of 2009 to prove there was racism in the selection of his jury and in the criminal justice system in general in capital murder trials.
If he wins his claim, Robinson will have his sentence converted to life in prison without parole. His lawyers are using a statistical study, by researchers from Michigan State University, that said prosecutors since 1990 have been more than twice as likely to dismiss otherwise qualified black potential jurors than non-black jurors. They say it shows racism in the selection of his jury, which had nine whites, two blacks and one American Indian.
Cronin testified that there is an inherent risk in such studies that attempt to ferret out racism. "It's difficult to pin that down," he said. The study may ascribe the prosecutors' juror strikes to being race-based when they are based on other facts, he said.
"Race as a variable is one of the variables, and may simply indicate a minority population that has a cultural and political ideology that would make it less likely to be favored by the majority population, which is represented by the state," Cronin said. "And the state's interest is to represent that majority population and its intent for laws, punishment, etc."
Race "is sometimes simply a placeholder for a minority populations divergent political opinions," he said.
In cross-examination from Robinson lawyer James Ferguson II, Cronin said it is wrong to assume that every black person would have the same opinion on the death penalty or any other issue.
"I think you can make generalizations, but to make assumptions, that would be dangerous," Cronin said."
"A political scientist testified at the Robinson Racial Justice Act hearing Monday that juror ideology, not racism, can explain the results of a statistical study that said local and North Carolina prosecutors have dismissed black jurors more frequently than whites from capital murder trials.
Polls repeatedly have found that black Americans are likely to be politically liberal, oppose the death penalty and mistrust the criminal justice system more than whites and other racial groups, said Christopher Cronin of the Methodist University political science department, in testimony for the prosecution.
There has been previous prosecution testimony that black jurors cited in the statistical study were peremptorily dismissed not because of their race, but because they expressed reservations about the death penalty, had criminal records or other factors that made them undesirable to the prosecution.
Lawyers for defendant Marcus Reymond Robinson contend that the stated reasons are nothing more than a pretense attempting to hide an underlying racism.
Robinson, who is black, is on death row for the 1991 murder of Erik Tornblom, who was white. Now Robinson is attempting to use the Racial Justice Act of 2009 to prove there was racism in the selection of his jury and in the criminal justice system in general in capital murder trials.
If he wins his claim, Robinson will have his sentence converted to life in prison without parole. His lawyers are using a statistical study, by researchers from Michigan State University, that said prosecutors since 1990 have been more than twice as likely to dismiss otherwise qualified black potential jurors than non-black jurors. They say it shows racism in the selection of his jury, which had nine whites, two blacks and one American Indian.
Cronin testified that there is an inherent risk in such studies that attempt to ferret out racism. "It's difficult to pin that down," he said. The study may ascribe the prosecutors' juror strikes to being race-based when they are based on other facts, he said.
"Race as a variable is one of the variables, and may simply indicate a minority population that has a cultural and political ideology that would make it less likely to be favored by the majority population, which is represented by the state," Cronin said. "And the state's interest is to represent that majority population and its intent for laws, punishment, etc."
Race "is sometimes simply a placeholder for a minority populations divergent political opinions," he said.
In cross-examination from Robinson lawyer James Ferguson II, Cronin said it is wrong to assume that every black person would have the same opinion on the death penalty or any other issue.
"I think you can make generalizations, but to make assumptions, that would be dangerous," Cronin said."
Friday, February 10, 2012
Chicago Can Learn About Crime Reduction from New York - NYTimes.com
Chicago Can Learn About Crime Reduction from New York - NYTimes.com
"Chicago gnashed its teeth as the New York Giants won the Super Bowl.
It should do the same over crime.
More notable than the Giants’ unforeseen playoff run is a stunning decline in crime in New York that shatters many assumptions about law enforcement and could serve as a road map for Chicago.
It explains why Franklin E. Zimring, a criminal justice expert at the University of California, Berkeley, will headline an A-list symposium hosted by the University of Chicago Crime Lab on Friday. His new book, “The City That Became Safe,” (Oxford University Press, 2012), is mostly about New York, but it should be required reading for policy makers and nervous citizens here.
“We thought the only way to reduce crime was to lock people up,” Mr. Zimring said. “In New York, incarceration went down and crimes went down.”
For the past century, ups and downs in crime have fit a pattern nationwide. In the early 1990s there was a sharp rise amid a crack cocaine epidemic, and New York and Chicago had strikingly similar crime rates.
The fluctuations gave birth to a powerful conventional wisdom that law-enforcement strategies couldn’t have much impact, noted Roseanna Ander, executive director of the crime lab.
Poverty, inequality, racism, drug use and gang wars were cited as root causes that couldn’t really be overcome by even the most vigilant beat officers. If there was a consensus, it was simple and macho: arrest more people and lock ’em up.
But New York is lapping Chicago and nearly every big city by any index one inspects. The homicide rate alone in New York is about one-third of Chicago’s. And New York’s incarceration rates have fallen rapidly even as robbery, burglary, auto theft, larceny, rape and assault rates have declined faster than elsewhere.
Mr. Zimring, a former University of Chicago law school professor, has exhaustively analyzed New York’s dramatic drop over the past 20 years. He scrutinized factors like economic inequality, children in single-parent homes, accessibility to guns, immigration patterns, you name it. He dissected patterns like heavy immigration by Asians, who have low crime rates, and New York’s persistently higher youth unemployment and poverty rates.
Nothing really seems to account for New York’s differences other than increases in police resources and strategies focused on serious crime, and not, according to Mr. Zimring, the often mythologized “quality of life,” or so-called “broken windows” strategies that concentrate on, say, public prostitution or gambling.
Thus, limiting drug violence by shutting open-air drug markets proved to be a far bigger and smartly executed priority than chasing hookers.
All that is relevant to Chicago since Garry F. McCarthy, the new police superintendent, is a product of the New York Police Department. Mr. McCarthy, who will join Mr. Zimring at the symposium on Friday, most recently led the police force in another crime-plagued city, Newark, and introduced New York’s now-famous Compstat system there. For sure, to read “The City That Became Safe” is to wonder if duplication here might bring salvation, even if the author himself is uncertain about some elements.
Mr. McCarthy has made Compstat, a process of data mapping and analysis, a crucial part of Chicago’s crime-fighting campaign.
In Compstat sessions, local commanders must go into granular detail about recent crimes and face tough but fair-minded questioning from bosses."
"Chicago gnashed its teeth as the New York Giants won the Super Bowl.
It should do the same over crime.
More notable than the Giants’ unforeseen playoff run is a stunning decline in crime in New York that shatters many assumptions about law enforcement and could serve as a road map for Chicago.
It explains why Franklin E. Zimring, a criminal justice expert at the University of California, Berkeley, will headline an A-list symposium hosted by the University of Chicago Crime Lab on Friday. His new book, “The City That Became Safe,” (Oxford University Press, 2012), is mostly about New York, but it should be required reading for policy makers and nervous citizens here.
“We thought the only way to reduce crime was to lock people up,” Mr. Zimring said. “In New York, incarceration went down and crimes went down.”
For the past century, ups and downs in crime have fit a pattern nationwide. In the early 1990s there was a sharp rise amid a crack cocaine epidemic, and New York and Chicago had strikingly similar crime rates.
The fluctuations gave birth to a powerful conventional wisdom that law-enforcement strategies couldn’t have much impact, noted Roseanna Ander, executive director of the crime lab.
Poverty, inequality, racism, drug use and gang wars were cited as root causes that couldn’t really be overcome by even the most vigilant beat officers. If there was a consensus, it was simple and macho: arrest more people and lock ’em up.
But New York is lapping Chicago and nearly every big city by any index one inspects. The homicide rate alone in New York is about one-third of Chicago’s. And New York’s incarceration rates have fallen rapidly even as robbery, burglary, auto theft, larceny, rape and assault rates have declined faster than elsewhere.
Mr. Zimring, a former University of Chicago law school professor, has exhaustively analyzed New York’s dramatic drop over the past 20 years. He scrutinized factors like economic inequality, children in single-parent homes, accessibility to guns, immigration patterns, you name it. He dissected patterns like heavy immigration by Asians, who have low crime rates, and New York’s persistently higher youth unemployment and poverty rates.
Nothing really seems to account for New York’s differences other than increases in police resources and strategies focused on serious crime, and not, according to Mr. Zimring, the often mythologized “quality of life,” or so-called “broken windows” strategies that concentrate on, say, public prostitution or gambling.
Thus, limiting drug violence by shutting open-air drug markets proved to be a far bigger and smartly executed priority than chasing hookers.
All that is relevant to Chicago since Garry F. McCarthy, the new police superintendent, is a product of the New York Police Department. Mr. McCarthy, who will join Mr. Zimring at the symposium on Friday, most recently led the police force in another crime-plagued city, Newark, and introduced New York’s now-famous Compstat system there. For sure, to read “The City That Became Safe” is to wonder if duplication here might bring salvation, even if the author himself is uncertain about some elements.
Mr. McCarthy has made Compstat, a process of data mapping and analysis, a crucial part of Chicago’s crime-fighting campaign.
In Compstat sessions, local commanders must go into granular detail about recent crimes and face tough but fair-minded questioning from bosses."
Thursday, February 9, 2012
New pretrial program will screen defendants, offer 'risk score' to judges | NOLA.com
New pretrial program will screen defendants, offer 'risk score' to judges | NOLA.com
"The process for determining who remains behind bars and who goes free after an arrest in New Orleans has remained largely unchanged through the years. There are a small number of defendants who are able to quickly secure their release -- sometimes on their own recognizance -- after an attorney contacts a judge.
But most defendants booked with state crimes, both major and minor, end up appearing before a judge or magistrate commissioner who evaluate the defendant's charges, rap sheet and other factors before setting a cash bond amount.
Those who can afford the bond are released, while those who can't remain in jail.
But starting this month, a new pretrial services program could change that process for good.
For the first time, a screener hired by the nonprofit Vera Institute of Justice will offer judges an independent assessment of whether a defendant can be safely released back into the community pending trial.
The screener will meet with the defendant before the bond hearing, and will ask a series of questions about his or her employment status and living situation. That information, along with detailed information about the defendant's criminal history, will then be entered onto a form and scored to measure that person's risk to public safety. Screeners will also attempt to verify certain information by phone."
"The process for determining who remains behind bars and who goes free after an arrest in New Orleans has remained largely unchanged through the years. There are a small number of defendants who are able to quickly secure their release -- sometimes on their own recognizance -- after an attorney contacts a judge.
But most defendants booked with state crimes, both major and minor, end up appearing before a judge or magistrate commissioner who evaluate the defendant's charges, rap sheet and other factors before setting a cash bond amount.
Those who can afford the bond are released, while those who can't remain in jail.
But starting this month, a new pretrial services program could change that process for good.
For the first time, a screener hired by the nonprofit Vera Institute of Justice will offer judges an independent assessment of whether a defendant can be safely released back into the community pending trial.
The screener will meet with the defendant before the bond hearing, and will ask a series of questions about his or her employment status and living situation. That information, along with detailed information about the defendant's criminal history, will then be entered onto a form and scored to measure that person's risk to public safety. Screeners will also attempt to verify certain information by phone."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)