Table of Contents Title Page Juvenile Justice Policy and Problems, Policies, and
Program Performance in the States NEBRASKA-Portraying Juvenile Crime over Time MASSACHUSETTS- Evaluating Cops and Kids NEW MEXICO-Mixing Juveniles with Adults |
HAWAII-Painting a Portrait of Juvenile Robbery From "Juvenile Robbery Arrests in Honolulu: An Overview," by
the Youth Gang Project of the Social Science Research Institute, University of
Hawaii-Manoa and the Research & Statistics Branch, Crime Prevention & Justice
Assistance Division, Hawaii Department of the Attorney General. Problem Statement Despite a decline in juvenile violent crime in recent years, Hawaii experienced an increase of 60% in juvenile arrests for serious violent crime between 1987 and 1996. Most of the increase came in the categories of aggravated assault and robbery, with robbery arrests doubling from 1994 to 1996. In fact, robbery arrests alone accounted for almost two-thirds of juvenile arrests for serious violent crimes in Hawaii in 1996 and 1997. By comparison, robbery arrests for the nation as a whole in 1996 and 1997 accounted for only 40.9% and 39.9% of all serious violent juvenile arrests. Some assaults and robberies, along with a few high profile murders, garnered enough negative press to elevate public concern in spite of the overall decreases. Responding to this public concern, the Hawaii Department of the Attorney General commissioned the Youth Gang Project of the Social Science Research Institute at the University of Hawaii-Manoa and the Research & Statistics Branch of the Hawaii Crime Prevention & Justice Assistance Division to examine the characteristics of juvenile robbery. Purposes of Data The data gathered for this study provided a detailed overview of juvenile-perpetrated robbery in the City and County of Honolulu. The purpose of this project was to create a complete and accurate portrait of this particular youth crime to allow communities and policymakers to craft effective and informed prevention and intervention strategies to address this serious problem. Data Collection After examining arrest patterns, the Hawaii researchers concluded that 1991 was a typical "low arrest year" and 1997 a "high arrest year"; therefore, the two years represented an appropriate time frame within which to track the increase in juvenile robberies. The state Department of the Attorney General maintained a Juvenile Justice Information System (JJIS) which provided a master list of the City and County of Honolulu Police Department (HPD) arrests for juvenile robberies. From this list the researchers collected HPD files on robberies for which juveniles were arrested in 1991 and 1997. Initially, JJIS records for 1997 revealed 288 juvenile robbery arrests; the researchers selected every other arrest to obtain their sample of 144. Cases in which the police charge later changed from robbery to something else were purged from the sample. A later switching from offender-based to incident-based analysis of cases further reduced the sample size (while pulling in some arrestees previously eliminated) to a final total of 115 robbery incidents involving 198 juvenile arrests. The researchers then used the same process in selecting 1991 cases. Of the original 134 juvenile robbery arrests in 1991, 65 robbery incidents involving 122 juvenile arrests were included in the final sample. The resulting data, once coded, included the geographic location of the incident, the demographic characteristics of victim(s) and offender(s), weapon use, extensiveness of injury (if any), and type of object taken. The total collection and coding process lasted 10 weeks. To supplement the quantitative data, researchers conducted in-depth interviews with local school officials, law enforcement personnel, and state Department of Education administrators. Interviewers intended to capture qualitative information on patterns of juvenile offending and interviewees’ views on the impact of policy changes related to crime reporting. Data Analysis Based on Purposes of Data As stated, the purpose of this data collection effort was to provide a thorough overview of juvenile robberies occurring in the City and County of Honolulu. The researchers laid out the following picture of these particular offenses. Robbery incidents in the jurisdiction frequently involved more than one youth, and those engaged in robbery often committed robberies more than once in a calendar year. For example, in 1991, 27% of those arrested were repeat offenders, and, in 1997, repeat offenders made up 17% of the total. According to the data, robbery was predominantly a male-oriented offense. In 1991, the vast majority (95%) of those arrested for robbery were males. A shift occurred in 1997, however, and males accounted for 83% of those arrested in that period. Thus, the proportion of robbery arrests involving juvenile females more than tripled, going from 5% in 1991 to 17% in 1997. In 1997, juvenile robbery arrestees had a median age of 15, compared to a median age of 16 in 1991. The vast majority of those arrested for juvenile robbery came from economically marginal ethnic groups (notably Hawaiian/Part-Hawaiian and Samoan); these groups accounted for three-quarters of those arrested for the offense in 1991 and about two-thirds (65%) of those arrested in 1997. As for the victims of juvenile robbers, the data showed that their number nearly doubled in the jurisdiction between 1991 and 1997 (going from 67 to 128). Further analysis indicated that, while the absolute number of adult victims was roughly the same for both periods, the number of juvenile victims more than doubled. Within both time periods, the majority of juvenile victims were young and male, although young females made up a larger proportion of the victims in 1997 than they did in 1991. Ethnically, robbery victims differed over time and differed from the arrestees. In 1991, Caucasian youth made up the largest group (31%) of victims, followed by Hawaiians (25%), Filipinos (14%), and Asians (12%). In 1997, however, the proportion of Asian youth doubled (24%), with Caucasians (24%) continuing to comprise a large proportion of youth victims. Ethnic differences were also observed between juveniles arrested for robbery and their adult victims, with Asians comprising a large proportion of adult victims in both years. Robbery offenses were typically intragender, meaning that boys victimized boys and girls victimized girls, and interethnic, meaning that victims and offenders often came from different ethnic groups. Most juvenile victims were at least casually acquainted with their assailant(s). In fact, of the juvenile victims of robbery in 1991, 80% reported that they were robbed by someone they knew, at least casually; in 1997, about 60% knew their assailants. This relationship did not hold true for adult victims. In 1991, the vast majority (84%) of adult victims reported being victimized by strangers, while all of the adult victims in 1997 were robbed by strangers. Given the age of the youth involved as both robbery suspects and victims, it is not surprising that schools and streets around schools were the most likely settings for juvenile-perpetrated robberies. The median value of items stolen from all victims in 1991 was $19. However, in 1997, the value stolen decreased substantially, to a median value of $10. Money was the most common item taken, followed by jewelry and purses. In 1991, 28% of those robbery victims who reported money stolen reported the amount to be $2 or less; in 1997, that figure was 34%. The data also indicated that school-based robberies often involved small amounts of money and that street-based robberies were more likely to involve the loss of jewelry and purses. In 1991, 8% of juvenile robbery arrests involved tourists or visitors as victims; in 1997, the statistic dropped to 5%. In 1991, 22% of youths arrested for robbery reported gang involvement. However, in 1997, gang-involved youth accounted for only 5% of juvenile arrests. Weapons were not involved in a majority of juvenile robbery offenses, although the incidence of weapon use was different in the two years under study. A weapon was used in 11% of robbery incidents reported in 1991 and 23% in 1997. Specific weapon types changed within the study period as well. In 1991, in those few robbery incidents in which a weapon was used, over half (54%) involved a firearm. In 1997, knives were the most common weapon, used in 70% of the robberies involving weapons. In 1997, firearms accounted for only a small proportion (9%) of the weapons used in juvenile robberies. Interviews with state Department of Education officials and with Honolulu Police Department personnel suggested that an informal redefinition of robbery had occurred. Historically regarded as schoolyard "hijackings," school officials and police officers (and possibly parents) now frequently defined these incidents, in which older juveniles "bully" younger juveniles for small amounts of cash, as serious offenses warranting police involvement. While not wanting to minimize the seriousness of some juvenile-perpetrated robberies, the data summarized in this report suggested that schoolyard hijackings accounted for the bulk of the increase in juvenile robbery arrests made in the City and County of Honolulu. Recommendations As a result of the analysis performed by the Hawaiian researchers, it became clear that one approach to juvenile robbery was the "zero tolerance" attitude of school administrators, which in effect criminalizes behavior that had previously not been so considered. While full employment of criminal justice resources against undeniably dangerous juveniles was a response that was clearly appropriate, the researchers advocated a "balanced approach," mixing prevention, early intervention, and suppression of behavior, for less-serious juvenile offenders. They suggested that school officials pursue a violence prevention curriculum, particularly focusing on bullying, and increase adult supervision in school areas. They also suggested the use of school-based interventions, especially those designed to educate juveniles regarding the risks associated with carrying illegal weapons. The researchers noted that families and community members could be included more often in drafting possible solutions to dangerous situations and areas on or near campus. Finally, given the problem of interethnic juvenile violence, the researchers recommended racial/ethnic tolerance and sensitivity programs and curricula that could illuminate and foster acceptance of cultural diversity. Real and Potential Applications of Data The data generated by the Hawaii researchers documented areas that needed to be addressed by communities and criminal justice policymakers. Decisionmakers will now be better able to focus on specific conditions, offender/victim profiles, and other variables that influence juvenile robberies. They can also now take note of the unexpected results of the study, the finding that much of the recorded increase in juvenile robberies came from a reframing of, and new response to, behavior that had not previously been treated as criminal. This finding has implications for Practitioners and policymakers around the country. The finding suggests that some of the increases in recorded offenses and other statistics may, in fact, not reflect new crime. Instead, apparent crime increases may be due to changes in reporting policies or other practices that serve to "redefine" what constitutes a crime. Subsequent policy responses can be tempered by this realization, and a more rational, effective approach can be taken to resolve the problem.
|