Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice Policy Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tufts, J.
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, J. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Sentencing Juvenile Offenders: Comparing Public Preferences and Judicial Practice

Jennifer Tufts

Statistics Canada

Julian V. Roberts

University of Ottawa

The juvenile justice systems of most Western nations have been under considerable pressure to impose harsher penalties on juvenile offenders. Much of this pressure has come from politicians who argue that the public and juvenile courts are out of step, with the latter being more lenient than the public desire. This article reports findings from a representative national survey of the public, which permitted comparisons between the sentencing preferences of the public and the actual practice of youth courts. Respondents were asked to sentence offenders described in vignettes. The sentencing component employed a 2 x 2 x 2 design. The variables manipulated were age of offender (juvenile or adult), criminal history (first offender or recidivist), and nature of offence (burglary or assault). Results indicated concordance between the incarceration rates favored by members of the public and the practice of the courts. In addition, respondents were also asked questions about criminal victimization within the previous 12 months. Consistent with the findings of previous research, crime victims were no more punitive than respondents who did not report having been victimized.

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 13, No. 1, 46-64 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0887403402013001004


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Crime DelinquencyHome page
J. B. Sprott and A. N. Doob
The Effect of Urban Neighborhood Disorder on Evaluations of the Police and Courts
Crime Delinquency, July 1, 2009; 55(3): 339 - 362.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Punishment SocietyHome page
A. King and S. Maruna
Is a conservative just a liberal who has been mugged?: Exploring the origins of punitive views
Punishment Society, April 1, 2009; 11(2): 147 - 169.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Criminal JusticeHome page
J. Roberts and M. Hough
Sentencing young offenders: Public opinion in England and Wales
JCriminology and Criminal Justice, August 1, 2005; 5(3): 211 - 232.
[Abstract] [PDF]