Traditional Rhetoric, Organizational Realities: Remand of Juveniles to Adult Court

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The remand of juveniles to adult court has traditionally been justified as providing protection to the public by identifying the most intractable and dangerous delinquents. The present analysis of the case histories of 214 remanded juveniles and interviews with key decision makers does not support this traditional rhetoric. There is little evidence to suggest that those juveniles remanded are singularly dangerous or intractable, nor is there evidence to suggest that their remand enhances public safety. In contrast to traditional rhetoric, the present analysis suggests that organizational and political factors account for the high rate of remand. In evidencing a willingness to relinquish jurisdiction over a small percentage of its clientele, and by portraying these juveniles as the most intractable and the greatest threat to public safety, the juvenile system not only creates an effective symbolic gesture regarding protection of the public but it also advances its territorial interests in maintaining jurisdiction over the vast majority of juveniles and deflecting more encompassing criticisms of the entire system.

This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit: