Hey to all the fellow bloggers out there! I am your official youth crime reporter from Edmonton, AB. I had my first appearance in room 444 today, as an observer, not an offender. In case you're wondering, room 444 is the youth court found in the downtown core of Alberta's capital. It was quite an interesting experience to say the least. I was not sure what to expect, as I have never been to any form of court before.
The people I saw were very stereotypical under the social definition of 'criminals'. The majority of the offenders were members of minority groups; the boys were dressed in baggy clothes, with jeans below their bottoms and big, dark sweatshirts and baseball caps with hoods up. The girls were dressed in revealing, tight clothing. Most of their parents were not present, and if so, they looked as troubled as their children. What I mean by this is a stereotypical view in itself. I only knew for sure of one women being a girls mother, but she was poorly dressed as well, wearing a beer logo t-shirt and ripped jeans. I'm not exactly sure what this really says, but it does make me wonder if that was the best outfit choice for your daughters hearing, and if its even appropriate outside the courtroom. It is the way they dressed and looked that led me to the conclusion that perhaps the 1st and 3rd wave of Modernist/Positivist approaches to juvenile deviance were accurate. It seems as though environment has a lot to do with youth behavior. It was clear that these young soon to be adults did not come from wealthy involved families. The reason for their actions were easily explained by their unstable environments, for example, a young girl was caught shoplifting, and it was mentioned that she had gotten kicked out of her mother's home and was just settling in with her grandmother.
I wasn't sure what to expect in the sense of the crimes, and punishments. I had no idea what young persons went to court for, and what they received as punishment. I witnessed the case of a 16-year-old non-Caucasian grade 12 student who resides with his grandparents. He was arrested and in court for several reasons. He plead not guilty to a break and entering charge that caused damage and was scheduled a trial date in December. He was charged with mischief, and pleads guilty. Lastly, he was arrested for attempting to dine and dash at a restaurant. The judge gave him a probation period of 6 months, where he would have to: pay the fines, do community service hours, attend school on a regular basis, report to his probation officer, appear in court when required, pay the amount due at the attempted dine and dash restaurant and write a letter of apology to the owner of that restaurant. My question is, what led him to commit these crimes, and was it worth it? Perhaps there is still a hedonistic aspect in crime today. He may have been driven by the pleasure seeking principle, and just didn't care about the punishment of the crime. Just based on the little interaction I had with the situation, I would probably guess that boredom, an unstable environment and peer pressure (he was with another boy while dining and dashing) were all causes of his crime(s). I strongly feel peer pressure was a large aspect of his dining and dashing crime. The crown even mentioned how he had tried to pay with a gift certificate, but it was deemed a fake so his friend just started to run out the door, so he followed suit. The fact that he doesn't live with his parents shows that they either were not fit parents, or they were unable to handle their son.
Unfortunately, that is all that can be said about this particularly day, until next time! Your YCR is signing off!
October 26, 2007
Hey everyone, YCR back with another blog about Rm. 444! It's only my second visit, but the action in the courtroom doesn't change by much. The youth are dressed the same as the first group and are mostly those of the minority. However this time there appears to be a much greater number of boys than there are girls.
As I was sitting in this busy courtroom on a Friday morning, there was one particular case that intrigued me. He was a 17-year-old white male, who plead guilty to tobacco use and shoplifting. He stole a stick of deodorant from superstore and ended up in Rm. 444. This leads me to the arguments his representative made for him in court. His lawyer acknowledged that he had no intent to pay and that he ran across the parking lot, until a manager caught him. His lawyer then stated, that the youth had: no previous record, a job as a truck unloader, a stable environment (lives with roommates) and is taking correspondents to finish high school as well as having aspirations to be a musician. This is a very good example of the use of risk assessment. The mentioning of all that is good in his life, is trying to show that he is really an all around good guy, and the incident was just a mistake. All of these facts presented are trying to show that it is unlikely of him to re-offend so the judge should go easy on him. This is a good approach in our justice system because it really is truly possible that a good person can get caught doing something bad. They really do have a lot of things going for them, but they mess up either because of peer pressure, boredom, or just the need for excitement. The risk assessment gives the youth the opportunity to prove that they are really good individuals that deserve a second chance. In this case, the judge concurred and considered the youth’s discharge because she said, "I can also see the potential, and he just needs to grow up." The terms of his release were; keep the peace (good behavior), 40 hours of community service, report to probation officer, letter of apology to the owner of superstore, as well as a letter to the judge herself and lastly EJS. I had no idea what EJS stood for, and for those of you who are also unsure of what EJS stands for and what it implies, I found its definition on the YRAP website and it is listed below. It is a program youth have to apply to and get accepted into.
EJS is a program outside of the court system, where an offender accepts responsibility for their actions and is given a list of consequences intended to answer for any harm caused. This gives them a second chance to take steps to correct a situation before entering the formal court process. If they successfully complete the conditions involved the charges will be withdrawn, and they avoid a Criminal Record.
- http://www.yrap.org/principles/
The other part of his probation that I wanted to point out was the letter to the judge. In the courtroom, the judge asked the individual to include in his letter the following things; "Why did you do this? How has it affected others around you? What have you learned from this? What steps will you take not to be involved in something like this again?" I thought this was a great way to let the victim speak. It allows the judge to have a greater insight about the particular individual, rather than him just being a number. She is able to get a greater understanding of why he thought it was necessary to steal an eight-dollar stick of deodorant rather than just pay for it. She also is able to understand if he truly grasps who has been affected by his behavior including how offending has affected himself.
This is an observation that may not be an acceptable one to come up with after only two visits, however, it is a bit strange that out of all the cases I have witnessed (approx. 40) the only one where the offender was viewed as a good guy who had made a mistake and was asked to share his reasoning’s (via a letter to the crown), was a white male. The other cases I saw, which were all or mostly minorities, were given the similar punishment of community service, probation periods, etc and were treated as though they were likely to re-offend. They were not required to answer questions like who has been affected by this behavior? Or how the offending behavior has affected them? I am curious as to why I haven't seen the individuals of the minority groups be asked to explain their behavior, or how it has affected them. So, I’d like for you to keep this observation in mind, and I will see if it progresses throughout my next few visits.
As for right now, that is all from your YCR, until next time!
As I was sitting in this busy courtroom on a Friday morning, there was one particular case that intrigued me. He was a 17-year-old white male, who plead guilty to tobacco use and shoplifting. He stole a stick of deodorant from superstore and ended up in Rm. 444. This leads me to the arguments his representative made for him in court. His lawyer acknowledged that he had no intent to pay and that he ran across the parking lot, until a manager caught him. His lawyer then stated, that the youth had: no previous record, a job as a truck unloader, a stable environment (lives with roommates) and is taking correspondents to finish high school as well as having aspirations to be a musician. This is a very good example of the use of risk assessment. The mentioning of all that is good in his life, is trying to show that he is really an all around good guy, and the incident was just a mistake. All of these facts presented are trying to show that it is unlikely of him to re-offend so the judge should go easy on him. This is a good approach in our justice system because it really is truly possible that a good person can get caught doing something bad. They really do have a lot of things going for them, but they mess up either because of peer pressure, boredom, or just the need for excitement. The risk assessment gives the youth the opportunity to prove that they are really good individuals that deserve a second chance. In this case, the judge concurred and considered the youth’s discharge because she said, "I can also see the potential, and he just needs to grow up." The terms of his release were; keep the peace (good behavior), 40 hours of community service, report to probation officer, letter of apology to the owner of superstore, as well as a letter to the judge herself and lastly EJS. I had no idea what EJS stood for, and for those of you who are also unsure of what EJS stands for and what it implies, I found its definition on the YRAP website and it is listed below. It is a program youth have to apply to and get accepted into.
EJS is a program outside of the court system, where an offender accepts responsibility for their actions and is given a list of consequences intended to answer for any harm caused. This gives them a second chance to take steps to correct a situation before entering the formal court process. If they successfully complete the conditions involved the charges will be withdrawn, and they avoid a Criminal Record.
- http://www.yrap.org/principles/
The other part of his probation that I wanted to point out was the letter to the judge. In the courtroom, the judge asked the individual to include in his letter the following things; "Why did you do this? How has it affected others around you? What have you learned from this? What steps will you take not to be involved in something like this again?" I thought this was a great way to let the victim speak. It allows the judge to have a greater insight about the particular individual, rather than him just being a number. She is able to get a greater understanding of why he thought it was necessary to steal an eight-dollar stick of deodorant rather than just pay for it. She also is able to understand if he truly grasps who has been affected by his behavior including how offending has affected himself.
This is an observation that may not be an acceptable one to come up with after only two visits, however, it is a bit strange that out of all the cases I have witnessed (approx. 40) the only one where the offender was viewed as a good guy who had made a mistake and was asked to share his reasoning’s (via a letter to the crown), was a white male. The other cases I saw, which were all or mostly minorities, were given the similar punishment of community service, probation periods, etc and were treated as though they were likely to re-offend. They were not required to answer questions like who has been affected by this behavior? Or how the offending behavior has affected them? I am curious as to why I haven't seen the individuals of the minority groups be asked to explain their behavior, or how it has affected them. So, I’d like for you to keep this observation in mind, and I will see if it progresses throughout my next few visits.
As for right now, that is all from your YCR, until next time!
October 31, 2007
Oh it was a spook-tacular day in room 444 on this morning of Halloween. This was the first time I was able to stay until the court was adjourned. I can easily say that this allowed me to witness a lot of different situations all in one session. This will probably lead me to write two blog posts on this particular day just because there is so much to talk about. I was also lucky enough to have sat beside a young volunteer by the name of Erin, who also took Sociology 321 at the University of Alberta. This interested her in becoming a volunteer court worker. She was able to fill me in on some things I did not already know about in the Youth Court.
One of the very first cases was an 18-year-old brown male with no previous record, he plead guilty for fraud under $5,000. He worked as a cashier at the Bay, and was charging things to his debit card, and then rebating himself. He was eventually caught and based on his age; his trial should have gone to adult court. The judge told him that if he had gone to adult court, there was no question that he would be given a jail sentence because he breached a position of trust with his employer. However, the youth's lawyer argued that he was cooperative with the authorities, and the day of and the day after his arrest he had already paid back $1,616.50 of the $4,753.67 stolen. The lawyer mentioned that the young offender is currently attending N.A.I.T with a high school diploma, and is working part time at an ice cream parlor. He mentions this to show how the offender is on the right track and recognizes what he has done wrong. The judge makes it clear that fraud is a serious offense, and being 18 years old, this or anything like this cannot happen again by this young adult. Luckily, he was only ordered a probation period of 12 months. The terms of his probation were pretty standard; he is required to keep the peace (good behavior), report to a probation officer at least once a month, pay back the remaining amount of what he stole, can't leave Alberta unless approved by his probation officer, is to have no contact with the co-accused, as well as complete 75 hours of community service. This seems reasonable compared to a jail sentence.
A brief recess occurred which gave me a chance to speak to Erin a bit more about her thoughts on Youth Court. We discussed the case above and came to the conclusion that Youth Court does a very good job of being lenient with the youth. They seem to try really hard to give these youth a second chance. They try to apply conditions that the youth will realistically be able to complete in the time period given based on their way of life. Just before the recess session, there was a young girl who was having a hard time paying off her outstanding balance (I'm not sure what her case entailed) but the judge gave her a 3-month extension. She has a one-year-old son, and the court seemed to acknowledge it would be hard for her to pay it all back at once. The judge even asked her what day of the week was best for her to schedule her next court date. Erin was telling me that something like this would never happen in adult court. They assign a date and time, and the adult must find a way to attend. On that note, a lot of the youth fail to attend their court dates. Erin informed me that if the youth don't appear for their court date, it may be a breach of their conditions (terms of probation) and they get charged as well as a warrant out for their arrest. She told me that the lawyers and duty council try hard to not let this happen. They will approach the crown, call out someone’s name, and if they are not present, they ask to suspend it till the end of the day in the hopes of contacting the individual or having them show up. Other times, the parents or guardians come in and speak on the child's behalf.
One of the very first cases was an 18-year-old brown male with no previous record, he plead guilty for fraud under $5,000. He worked as a cashier at the Bay, and was charging things to his debit card, and then rebating himself. He was eventually caught and based on his age; his trial should have gone to adult court. The judge told him that if he had gone to adult court, there was no question that he would be given a jail sentence because he breached a position of trust with his employer. However, the youth's lawyer argued that he was cooperative with the authorities, and the day of and the day after his arrest he had already paid back $1,616.50 of the $4,753.67 stolen. The lawyer mentioned that the young offender is currently attending N.A.I.T with a high school diploma, and is working part time at an ice cream parlor. He mentions this to show how the offender is on the right track and recognizes what he has done wrong. The judge makes it clear that fraud is a serious offense, and being 18 years old, this or anything like this cannot happen again by this young adult. Luckily, he was only ordered a probation period of 12 months. The terms of his probation were pretty standard; he is required to keep the peace (good behavior), report to a probation officer at least once a month, pay back the remaining amount of what he stole, can't leave Alberta unless approved by his probation officer, is to have no contact with the co-accused, as well as complete 75 hours of community service. This seems reasonable compared to a jail sentence.
A brief recess occurred which gave me a chance to speak to Erin a bit more about her thoughts on Youth Court. We discussed the case above and came to the conclusion that Youth Court does a very good job of being lenient with the youth. They seem to try really hard to give these youth a second chance. They try to apply conditions that the youth will realistically be able to complete in the time period given based on their way of life. Just before the recess session, there was a young girl who was having a hard time paying off her outstanding balance (I'm not sure what her case entailed) but the judge gave her a 3-month extension. She has a one-year-old son, and the court seemed to acknowledge it would be hard for her to pay it all back at once. The judge even asked her what day of the week was best for her to schedule her next court date. Erin was telling me that something like this would never happen in adult court. They assign a date and time, and the adult must find a way to attend. On that note, a lot of the youth fail to attend their court dates. Erin informed me that if the youth don't appear for their court date, it may be a breach of their conditions (terms of probation) and they get charged as well as a warrant out for their arrest. She told me that the lawyers and duty council try hard to not let this happen. They will approach the crown, call out someone’s name, and if they are not present, they ask to suspend it till the end of the day in the hopes of contacting the individual or having them show up. Other times, the parents or guardians come in and speak on the child's behalf.
October 31, 2007... Continued
On October 26th, I mentioned how in the court sessions I went to I only saw one white male be asked who his behavior had affected and how it had affected himself. After today's long session, I thought I would see a similar question be asked to other young offenders. However this was not the case. I do want to make it clear, that this is only an observation. It does not mean that there is a clear biased of race, nor careless judges in the courtroom. An observation can just as easily be a coincidence. The reason I bothered to mention this is because I thought that was a good thing to be asking the youth. It gives them a voice and a chance to think about what they did. As well as shows them that there is someone that cares about them. The judge cares to know about the cause of the behavior and what it means.
Although I did not see a judge asking a young offender these sorts of questions, I did see an interesting case. I witnessed a small bickering argument between the judge and the lawyer. This was all over one individual who was in EYOC and therefore listening from the room on CCTV. She was a 17-year-old who plead guilty to robbery and failure to appear in court. The part about this case that was unusual was that the young teenage girl had Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Just like all the other youths I have seen, she received similar terms of probation. She had to reimburse the 95 dollars she had stolen, had a 9 month probation period (right up until her 18th birthday) she was to have no contact with the others' involved, 50 hours community service, keep the peace, appear before the youth court when asked, assigned a probation officer, etc. However arguments arose when the crown and the judge suggested she get counseling as part of her probation. The duty council mentioned how the young girl had no previous record, and said it was a big deal that she was a 17 year old with FAS and to not have been in the juvenile system yet. The crown and the judge argued that robbery was a serious offense and she needs some sort of counseling. The defender strongly disagreed with this sentence because she has FAS; called her 'brain damaged' and the reason for her actions was being in the wrong situation at the wrong time. She was peer pressured and because of her FAS she was easily led and influenced. The defender argued that counseling would not have been beneficial to the youth and would not work because she is incapable of proper conversation and relation with others. If they had assigned counseling/help as part of her probation, it would just be setting her up to fail because a breach charge would occur. The probation officer would not understand her situation and just assume she did not complete all of the requirements of her probation. All the meanwhile, this poor girl is in a box, in a youth detention center listening to people argue about her 'brain damage'. It was a really sad moment for me to witness because she was not given a voice and was just listening to people talk about her and a disease she had no control over.
This particular case showed me that the youth court may be a bit lenient and really do want the youth to do well and get themselves out of the system, but they still have a lot to learn. As Erin and I talked about, the youth court may be good at giving the right amount of community service hours or other requirements based on the individual, they can still be pretty standardized probation requirements. The terms of probation for all the youth I witnessed all contained: keeping the peace, appear before the youth court when asked to, assigned a probation officer, live somewhere approved by the probation officer, a certain number of community service hours, some form of counseling (ie. anger management) and a certain time period of probation. Those last few are assigned based on the individual. However, when it comes to the case of other individuals that differ from the standard, the youth court seems to have difficulty deviating from the standard way of handling cases. The duty council made convincing arguments about the young girl having no previous record, having FAS and pointing out assigning counseling as part of her probation would just be setting her up to fail. The judge had difficulty seeing this point of view because counseling is usually a part of the probation period. It may be hard to allow a youth to ‘get away’ with not doing this part of the process. Unfortunately, the lawyer had a point about this particular youth and it seemed unfair for her to be treated like those without a form of brain damage.
It was a long morning in Rm. 444 yet an eventful one. It was great to talk to Erin and get a little insight into the Youth Court System as well as to see an FAS youth be treated similar to the rest of the youth. That is all from your YCR!! Happy Halloween!!
Although I did not see a judge asking a young offender these sorts of questions, I did see an interesting case. I witnessed a small bickering argument between the judge and the lawyer. This was all over one individual who was in EYOC and therefore listening from the room on CCTV. She was a 17-year-old who plead guilty to robbery and failure to appear in court. The part about this case that was unusual was that the young teenage girl had Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Just like all the other youths I have seen, she received similar terms of probation. She had to reimburse the 95 dollars she had stolen, had a 9 month probation period (right up until her 18th birthday) she was to have no contact with the others' involved, 50 hours community service, keep the peace, appear before the youth court when asked, assigned a probation officer, etc. However arguments arose when the crown and the judge suggested she get counseling as part of her probation. The duty council mentioned how the young girl had no previous record, and said it was a big deal that she was a 17 year old with FAS and to not have been in the juvenile system yet. The crown and the judge argued that robbery was a serious offense and she needs some sort of counseling. The defender strongly disagreed with this sentence because she has FAS; called her 'brain damaged' and the reason for her actions was being in the wrong situation at the wrong time. She was peer pressured and because of her FAS she was easily led and influenced. The defender argued that counseling would not have been beneficial to the youth and would not work because she is incapable of proper conversation and relation with others. If they had assigned counseling/help as part of her probation, it would just be setting her up to fail because a breach charge would occur. The probation officer would not understand her situation and just assume she did not complete all of the requirements of her probation. All the meanwhile, this poor girl is in a box, in a youth detention center listening to people argue about her 'brain damage'. It was a really sad moment for me to witness because she was not given a voice and was just listening to people talk about her and a disease she had no control over.
This particular case showed me that the youth court may be a bit lenient and really do want the youth to do well and get themselves out of the system, but they still have a lot to learn. As Erin and I talked about, the youth court may be good at giving the right amount of community service hours or other requirements based on the individual, they can still be pretty standardized probation requirements. The terms of probation for all the youth I witnessed all contained: keeping the peace, appear before the youth court when asked to, assigned a probation officer, live somewhere approved by the probation officer, a certain number of community service hours, some form of counseling (ie. anger management) and a certain time period of probation. Those last few are assigned based on the individual. However, when it comes to the case of other individuals that differ from the standard, the youth court seems to have difficulty deviating from the standard way of handling cases. The duty council made convincing arguments about the young girl having no previous record, having FAS and pointing out assigning counseling as part of her probation would just be setting her up to fail. The judge had difficulty seeing this point of view because counseling is usually a part of the probation period. It may be hard to allow a youth to ‘get away’ with not doing this part of the process. Unfortunately, the lawyer had a point about this particular youth and it seemed unfair for her to be treated like those without a form of brain damage.
It was a long morning in Rm. 444 yet an eventful one. It was great to talk to Erin and get a little insight into the Youth Court System as well as to see an FAS youth be treated similar to the rest of the youth. That is all from your YCR!! Happy Halloween!!
Conclusions
After sitting in on a few different court sessions, I was able to get a greater understanding of what is being done with youth crime today. Going into this assignment I was unsure of what to expect. It was interesting to see the different reasons for the youth being there, whether it had been something as minor as stealing a stick of deodorant, or as serious as fraud under $5,000. It was also good to see that the court seemed to care about the youth and really wanted them to get out of the system. Hopefully with time, youth who differ from the norm can be treated as such when they are receiving their sentence. Otherwise they will just be set up to fail. I also think that an important aspect they should do more often is to let the victim speak. As part of the probation, ask the youth why they did what they did? and who it has affected. That way they can actually truly understand who and how their behavior affects others as well as themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)