Chapter 7: Juvenile Crime and Victimization

THE UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS AND THE NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY
CRIME TRENDS
JUVENILE OFFENDERS
JUVENILE VICTIMS OF CRIME

THE UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS AND THE NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY

Two main government sources collect crime statistics. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) compiles the annual Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). The FBI notes in Crime in the United States, 2007 (September 2008, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/index.html) that the UCR, which was begun in 1930, now collects data from 17,738 city, county, and state law enforcement agencies.

The second set of crime statistics is the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which is prepared by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). Established in 1972, the survey is an annual federal statistical study that measures the levels of victimization resulting from criminal activity in the United States. According to the BJS, in “Crime and Victims Statistics” (August 29, 2008, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm), the survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of approximately 76,000 households each year, containing about 135,300 people, on the “frequency, characteristics and consequences of criminal victimization.” The survey was previously known as the National Crime Survey, but it was renamed and redesigned in 1992 to emphasize the measurement of victimization experienced by citizens. The survey was created because of a concern that the UCR did not fully portray the true volume of crime. The UCR provides data on crimes reported to law enforcement authorities, but it does not estimate how many crimes went unreported.

The NCVS is designed to complement the UCR. It measures the levels of criminal victimization of people and households for the crimes of rape, robbery, assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and larceny. Murder is not included because the NCVS data are gathered through interviews with victims. Definitions for these crimes are the same as those established by the UCR.

Some observers believe the NCVS is a better indicator of the volume of crime in the United States than the FBI statistics. Nonetheless, like all surveys, it is subject to error. The survey depends on people's memories of incidents that happened up to six months earlier. Many times, a victim is not sure what happened, even moments after the crime occurred. In addition, the NCVS limits the data to victims aged 12 and older, an admittedly arbitrary age selection.

CRIME TRENDS

Violent and Property Crimes

Michael R. Rand of the BJS reports in Criminal Victimization, 2007 (December 2008, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv07.pdf) that in 2007 U.S. residents experienced 22.9 million violent and property victimizations. Of these crimes, 17.5 million were property crimes (burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft), 3.7 million were violent crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault), and 194,100 were personal thefts (pocket picking and purse snatching). The rate of rape/sexual assault was up from 2005, but the rate for every other type of crime had decreased. (Budget constraints in 2006 changed data collection methods; therefore, 2006 data cannot be compared to previous and current years.)

According to Rand, between 2005 and 2007 the average yearly rate of violent crimes per 1,000 people aged 12 and older was essentially unchanged. In 2005 the violent crime rate was 21.1 per 1,000 people, and in 2007 it was 20.7 per 1,000 people, a decrease of 1.9%. For property crimes, the rate was 154.2 per 1,000 people in 2005 and 146.5 per 1,000 people in 2007, a decline of 5%. The rate for personal theft witnessed an 11.1% decrease, from 0.9 per 1,000 people to 0.8 per 1,000 people. Rand indicates that the 2007 violent and property crime rates were at their lowest levels since 1973, the first year when these data became available.

The UCR reports that most violent crimes—including murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault—remained fairly steady between 2006 and 2007, except for forcible rape, which decreased

2.5% between 2006 and 2007. The UCR also recorded decreasing violent crime rates over time. The violent crime rate had decreased from 758.2 per 100,000 people in 1991 to 466.9 per 100,000 in 2007.

According to the UCR, there were an estimated 9.8 million property crimes, including burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft, in 2007, down from nearly 10 million in 2006. This decline continued a long-term trend; in 2007, the property crime rate was 3,263.5 per 100,000 people, compared to a rate of 5,140.2 per 100,000 in 1991. This was a decrease of 37% in 16 years.

Trends in Juvenile Crime

According to the FBI, from the mid-1980s through the mid-1990s youth violence and crime grew at rapid rates. In Juvenile Victims and Offenders: 2006 National Report (March 2006, http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/nr2006/downloads/NR2006.pdf), Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund of the National Center for Juvenile Justice look at juvenile homicide trends. They find that between 1980 and 2002, murders by juveniles were highest in 1993 and 1994. During this 22-year span, the murders involving juvenile offenders acting alone decreased 68% and murders involving two or more juvenile offenders fell 60%.

The surge in youth crime and violence caused much concern in society. Various groups—public and private—undertook the mission of trying to uncover the reasons juvenile crime was on the rise. Lawmakers responded by toughening existing laws and finding ways to try more juveniles as adults. Courts levied stricter sentences, and parents and educators looked into various programs and methods geared to help their children and students deal with the situation. (See Chapter 10.)

However, the rise in juvenile crime did not last. Snyder and Sickmund note that in the 10-year period between 1994 and 2003, juvenile arrests decreased by 18%, compared to a 1% increase in arrests of adults during the same period. The arrest rate of juveniles for murder in 2003 was the lowest since at least 1980. According to Snyder and Sickmund, “The juvenile violent crime wave predicted by some in the mid-1990s has not occurred.”

JUVENILE OFFENDERS

For some young people, their teenage and young adult years are difficult and challenging times. Even though their peers are playing baseball, going to proms, singing in the school choir, heading to college, and making plans for the future, some juveniles and youths are, for whatever reason, committing crimes and having brushes with the law. When dealing with young offenders, each state has its own definition of the term juvenile : Most states put the upper age limit at 17 years old, although some states set it as low as 14 years old. When reporting its national crime statistics, the FBI considers those under the age of 18 to be juveniles. The FBI often breaks its juvenile crime statistics into age-based subcategories, such as age 16 and older and age 15 and younger, to demonstrate how juvenile offenses vary with age. The FBI does the same with youth, who are often defined as 18 to 24. However, some organizations and studies classify youth age ranges differently, citing youths as those aged 18 to 21 or aged 18 to 25.

The U.S. Department of Justice defines crime as all behaviors and acts for which society provides formally approved punishments. Written law, both federal and state, defines which behaviors are criminal and which are not. Some behaviors—murder, robbery, and burglary—have always been considered criminal. Other actions, such as domestic violence or driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, became classified as criminal actions more recently. Other changes in society have also influenced crime. For example, the widespread use of computers provides new opportunities for white-collar cybercrime, including identity theft and the malicious spread of computer viruses and worms.

Crime can range from actions as simple as taking a candy bar from a store without paying for it, to those as severe and violent as murder. Most people have broken some law, wittingly or unwittingly, at some time in their lives. Therefore, the true extent of criminality is impossible to measure. Researchers can only keep records of what is reported by victims or known to the police.

Risk Factors for Youth Violence

Various government entities, schools, student and parent organizations, and research groups have devoted countless hours to the issue of youth violence. One of their goals is to find ways to recognize the potential for violent behavior in youth before it becomes a serious problem. They work individually and sometimes collectively to outline trends in youth violence and to determine what factors lead to violent behavior.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) outlines in “Understanding Youth Violence: Fact Sheet” (2008, http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/YVFactSheet.pdf) the risk factors that increase the likelihood that a young person will become violent. These factors include a history of violent victimization or prior violence; drug, alcohol, or tobacco use; association with delinquent peers; a dysfunctional family life; poor grades; and poverty in the family or community. The CDC recommends several approaches to stopping youth violence, including programs to improve family relationships, school-based programs to treat nonviolent social development, role modeling through mentoring programs, and changes to physical and social environments to address the social and economic causes of violence.

In “Warning Signs of Youth Violence” (2004, http://www.apahelpcenter.org/featuredtopics/feature.php?id¼38 &ch¼3), the American Psychological Association lists immediate signs that youth violence is a serious possibility as well as

signs over a period that indicate a potential for violence. Signs that violence may be imminent include frequently losing temper, vandalizing, increasing substance use or risk-taking behavior, developing plans to commit violence, enjoying hurting animals, or carrying a weapon. The potential for violence exists when a young person has a history of aggressive behavior or substance abuse, has a strong desire to be in a gang, has a fascination with weapons, begins to withdraw from friends and usual activities, performs poorly in school, fails to respect the feelings or rights of others, or has a history of discipline problems.

In response to the Columbine High School shootings in 1999, the U.S. surgeon general began a comprehensive study of the status of youth and violence in the nation. Issued in 2001, Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General (http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence/) addresses many aspects of crime and violence, including risk factors for violence among youth aged 15 to 18. The report contains detailed information on early onset factors (ages six to 11), which include exposure to violence on television and substance abuse, as well as late onset factors (ages 12 to 14), which include aggression in general, antisocial attitudes, and abusive parents.

Those involved in the study of youth violence are quick to point out, however, that people need to be cautious when reacting to someone exhibiting warning signs. Even though it is important to provide help to a teenager with violent tendencies, harm could be caused by mislabeling him or her as being violent or by overreacting to a set of circumstances.

Homicide

The UCR defines murder and nonnegligent manslaughter as “the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human being by another.” However, it also stipulates that “deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder or assaults to murder,…are scored as aggravated assaults.” Approximately 16,929 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters occurred in 2007, down 0.6% from 2006.

In 2007, 17,040 people were identified as murder offenders, including 981 males and 80 females under the age of 18, and 3,574 males and 264 females under the age of 22. (See Table 7.1.) Because the identity of all murder offenders is not known, such figures are lower than they would be if all offenders had been identified. Those under age 18 represented 6.2% of all known murder offenders in that year, whereas those under age 22 represented 22.6% of all known murder offenders. Fewer than one out of 10 of all known murderers were female; 92.3% of all murder offenders under age 18 and 93% of all murder offenders under age 22 were males.

In 2007, 31% of all murderers were known to be white, 37.9% were known to be African-American, and 29.7% were of unknown race. (See Table 7.1.) These proportions were similar for juvenile murderers. Among 1,063 youth under age 18, 663 (62.4%) murder offenders were African-American, 372 (35%) were white, 21 (2%) were “other,” and 7 (0.7%) were unknown. Among 3,845 youth under age 22, 2,321 (60.4%) were African-American, 1,403 (36.5%) were white, 82 (2.1%) were “other,” and 39 (1%) were unknown.

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS KILLED . In Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2007 (October 2008, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2007/), the UCR provides statistics on the number of law enforcement officers feloniously killed between 1998 and 2007. During this 10-year period, 549 officers were killed—the highest number (70) occurred in 2001, not including the 72 deaths resulting from the terrorist attacks on September 11 of that year. In 2007, 57 officers were feloniously killed; six known offenders were juveniles under age 18. Between 1998 and 2007, 6.3% of murder offenders who killed law enforcement officers were under age 18 and 39.4% of offenders were young adults aged 18 to 24.

Rape

The UCR reports that even though there were an estimated 90,427 forcible rapes reported in 2007 (a 2.5% decrease from the previous year), only 17,132 people were arrested for rape in that year. Rape is one of the most underreported crimes, and the low arrest rate demonstrates how few perpetrators are caught. Of those actually arrested, 914 (5.3%) were under age 15 and 2,633 (15.4%) were under age 18.

Aggravated and Simple Assault

The UCR defines aggravated assault as “an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury…. This type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by other means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Attempted aggravated assault that involves the display of—or threat to use—a gun, knife, or other weapon is included in this crime category because serious personal injury would likely result if the assault were completed.” In 2007 an estimated 855,856 aggravated assaults were reported. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 327,137 people were arrested for aggravated assault in that year. Of that number, 13,662 (4.2%) were under age 15 and 43,459 (13.3%) were under age 18.

By contrast, simple assaults are assaults or attempted assaults not involving a weapon and not resulting in serious injury to the victim. These include acts such as assault and battery, resisting or obstructing the police, and hazing. In its arrest reports, the UCR lists a category called “other assaults” (to differentiate between these types of assaults and aggravated assaults). The UCR notes that 983,964 people were arrested for other assaults in 2007. Of that number, 70,038 (7.1%) were under age 15 and 181,378 (18.4%) were under age 18.

Robbery, Burglary, and Larceny-Theft

Robbery, burglary, and larceny-theft are different crimes under the UCR. Robbery is “the taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear,” and is categorized as a violent crime. Burglary involves “the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft,” and is classified as a property crime. Larceny-theft, which is also a property crime, is “the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another,” and includes crimes such as shoplifting, pocket-picking, purse-snatching, thefts from motor vehicles, thefts of motor vehicle parts and accessories, bicycle thefts, and so on. These offenses, taken together, are disproportionately committed by young people.

The UCR estimates that 445,125 robbery offenses had been committed in 2007, which was a small decrease (0.5%) over the previous year but represented an increase of 7.5% over robberies in 2003. In 2007, 96,720 people were arrested for robbery; those arrested were disproportionately young people. Of that number, 5,601 (5.8%) were under age 15 and 26,324 (27.2%) were under age 18.

In 2007 the UCR recorded 2,179,140 burglary offenses, a decrease of 0.2% from the previous year and a 6.6% decline from 10 years earlier. Burglary has a particularly low arrest rate. The UCR notes that 228,846 people were arrested for burglary in 2007. Of that number, 18,589 (8.1%) of perpetrators were under age 15 and 61,695 (27%) were under age 18.

The UCR recorded 6,568,572 larceny-theft offenses in 2007, a decrease of 0.6% from 2006 and an 11% decline from 10 years earlier. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 897,626 people were arrested for larceny-theft in 2007. Of that number, 71,314 (7.9%) of perpetrators were under age 15 and 229,837 (25.6%) were under age 18.

Motor-vehicle theft is also disproportionately perpetrated by young people, usually in urban areas. In 2007 there were 1,095,769 motor vehicle thefts nationwide. More than nine out of 10 (93.1%) motor vehicle thefts occurred in metropolitan areas. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 89,022 people were arrested for motor-vehicle theft in 2007. Of those arrested, 4,917 (5.5%) were under age 15 and 22,266 (25%) were under age 18.

Computer Crime

Illegally accessing a computer, known as hacking, is a crime committed frequently by juveniles. When it is followed by manipulation of the information in private, corporate, or government databases and networks, it can be quite costly. Another means of computer hacking involves the creation of what is known as a virus program. A virus

program is one that resides inside another program and is activated by some predetermined code to create havoc in the host computer. Virus programs can be spread through the sharing of disks and programs, by downloading executable files on the Internet, or, most commonly, through e-mail attachments.

Cases of juvenile hacking have been reported since the 1980s. In 1998 the U.S. Secret Service filed the first criminal case against a juvenile for a computer crime. The unnamed hacker shut down the Worcester, Massachusetts, airport in 1997 for six hours. The airport was integrated into the Federal Aviation Administration traffic system by telephone lines. The accused gained access to the communication system and disabled it by sending a series of computer commands that changed the data carried on the system. As a result, the airport could not function. (No accidents occurred during that time, however.) According to the Department of Justice, the juvenile pled guilty in return for two years probation, a fine, and community service.

Juveniles are sometimes caught hacking into school computer systems in an effort to change their grades and the grades of other students. At times, as in the case of 23 Fort Bend, Texas, students charged with hacking into the local high school's system, the monetary loss to the school system can be so large as to trigger felony charges. The hackers could have faced second-degree felony charges, carrying a penalty of up to 20 years in prison. However, the students were eventually punished by sending them to an alternative education class within the high school.

Other types of computer crime typically perpetrated by juveniles include trading stolen credit card and Social Security numbers and pirating of computer software that will be sold. Because of computer networks, juveniles and other perpetrators can commit these types of crimes on a large scale. In “It's Not Just Fun and ‘War Games’—Juveniles and Computer Crime” (April 26, 2005, http://www.cybercrime.gov/usamay 2001_7.htm), Joseph V. DeMarco, the assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, states that “the enormous computing power of today's PCs make it possible for minors to commit offenses which are disproportionately serious to their age.” Teens can commit property offenses on a large scale using computers, can portray themselves as adults in an online world, and “appear to have an ethical ‘deficit’ when it comes to computer crimes.” He points out that children and teens who would never commit robbery, burglary, or assault may in fact commit online crimes. For example, in May 2008 a 15-year-old boy was arrested in Downington, Pennsylvania, for hacking into a school computer system and copying files including personal information and Social Security numbers of school employees. Such information could be used to perpetrate identity theft.

Juveniles convicted of computer crimes sometimes face imprisonment in juvenile detention centers. The Department of Justice reports in “Massachusetts Teen Convicted for Hacking into Internet and Telephone Service Providers and Making Bomb Threats to High Schools in Massachusetts and Florida” (September 8, 2005, http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/juvenileSentboston.htm) that in 2005 a Massachusetts juvenile pled guilty to several hacking incidents and was sentenced to 11 months in a juvenile detention facility and 2 years of supervised release, during which period he was barred from owning or using a computer, cell phone, or any electronic equipment capable of accessing the Internet.

In October 2008, 20-year-old David Kernell, a college student at the University of Tennessee, was indicted for hacking into vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's (1964—) Yahoo e-mail account the previous month. The article “Details Emerge in Palin E-mail Hacking” (Associated Press, September 18, 2008, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26781334/) notes that the break-in to the personal e-mail account could have ramifications for the government because her administration had encouraged the use of Yahoo accounts rather than government e-mail accounts, “which could possibly be released to the public under Alaska's Open Records Act.” In March 2009 Kernell pleaded not guilty to three more charges in the case: fraud, unlawful electronic transmission of material outside Tennessee, and attempts to conceal records to impede an FBI investigation. He faced up to 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for the felony charges.

Illegal Drug Use

Various studies show that many violent offenders are substance abusers. For some people, drugs and alcohol may cause violent tendencies to surface. Lloyd D. Johnston et al. of the Institute for Social Research find in Monitoring the Future: National Results on Adolescent Drug Use, Overview of Key Findings, 2007 (2008, http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/overview2007.pdf) that in 2007, 35.9% of 12th graders, 28.1% of 10th graders, and 13.2% of eighth graders had used an illicit drug in the past year. Among 12th graders, marijuana/hashish use was highest (31.7%), followed by narcotics (9.2%), amphetamines (7.5%), barbiturates (6.2%), and tranquilizers (6.2%). Two-thirds (66.4%) had used alcohol in the past 12 months.

Other drugs gaining popularity in recent years included so-called club drugs, such as ecstasy (MDMA), flunitrazepam (known as the date rape drug), GHB, and ketamine. These drugs have been popular among teenagers at dance clubs and raves. Because each of these club drugs is scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act (Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970), they are illegal and their use constitutes a criminal offense. Johnston et al. note that in 2007, 4.5% of high school seniors had used MDMA, 1.3% had used ketamine, 1% had used flunitrazepam, and 0.9% had used GHB in the previous 12 months.

In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 1,386,394 people were arrested on drug abuse violations in 2007. Of that number, 21,506 (1.6%) were under age 15 and 147,382 (10.6%) were under age 18.

JUVENILE VICTIMS OF CRIME

Table 7.2 and Figure 7.1 outline the trends in nonfatal violent victimizations and homicides by select age groups

between 1976 and 2006. During these years the rate of violent victimizations dropped in all age categories, but especially among young people. In “Violent Victimization Rates by Age, 1973–2005” (September 10, 2006, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/vagetab.htm), the BJS indicates that in 1973 the violent victimization rate for those aged 12 to 15 was 81.8 per 1,000 people in that age group. The rate peaked in 1994 at 118.6 per 1,000 people then dropped steadily to 44 per 1,000 people in 2005, its lowest point in the 32 years recorded. For those aged 16 to 19, the rate in 1973 was 81.7. This group also reached its zenith in 1994 at 123.9 and then decreased steadily to 44.3 in 2005. The highest nonfatal violent victimization rate in 1973 was among ages 20 to 24 (87.6). This age group reached its highest point in 1991 with 103.6 and then fluctuated before dropping to 43.2 in 2004; however, it had risen again to 47.1 in 2005. In 2006 the violent victimization rate for 12- to 15-year-olds was 47.3 per 1,000 people, and for 16- to 19-year-olds it was 52.3 per 1,000 people. (See Table 7.2.)

Violent crime rates are highest for young people aged 24 and younger; after age 25 the violent victimization rate declines steadily. According to the BJS, in 1973 16- to 19-year-olds were about twice as likely to be victimized by violent crime as people 35 to 49 years of age in 2005. In 2006 16- to 19-year-olds were about two and a half times as likely as 35- to 49-year-olds to be victimized by violent crime. (See Table 7.2.)

Scott Menard of the University of Colorado notes in Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Adolescent Victimization (February 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/191210.pdf) that when someone is victimized as an adolescent, long-term consequences result. When compared to adults who were not victimized as adolescents, adults who were adolescent victims are most likely to have drug problems and more likely to perpetrate violence. They are also more likely to commit acts of domestic violence and become victims of domestic violence than are adults who were not victimized as adolescents. In addition, they are nearly twice as likely to become victims of violent crime and nearly three times as likely to commit property offenses. Their risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder is also twice as great.

Becoming a victim of crime can have serious consequences—outcomes that the victim neither asks for nor deserves. A victim rarely expects to be victimized and seldom knows where to turn for help. Victims may end up in the hospital to be treated and released, or they may be confined to bed for days, weeks, or longer. Injuries may be temporary, or they may be permanent and forever change the way the victim lives his or her life. Victims may lose money or property, or in the case of homicide their life. In many cases they lose their confidence, self-esteem, and feelings of security.

The effects of crime are not limited to the victim, however. A victim's family is frequently devastated, and

the psychological trauma may affect everyone connected to a victim. Victims and their families may experience feelings of fear, anger, shame, self-blame, helplessness, and depression—emotions that can last for years after the event. Those who were attacked in their home or whose home was entered illegally may no longer feel secure anywhere. They often blame themselves, feeling that they could have handled themselves better, or done something differently to prevent being victimized.

In the aftermath of crime, when victims most need support and comfort, there is often no one available who understands. Parents or spouses may be dealing with their own feelings of guilt and anger for not being able to protect their loved ones. Friends may withdraw, not knowing what to say or do. As a result, victims may lose their sense of self-esteem and no longer trust other people. These effects of violent victimization can be particularly devastating when the victim is a young person.

Child Abuse and Neglect

It is impossible to determine how many children suffer abuse. All observers can do is count the number of reported cases—which include only those known to public authorities—or they can survey families, in which case parents may deny or downplay abuse. As a result, estimates of child abuse are generally considered low. The Administration for Children, Youth, and Families (ACYF) is the primary source of national information on abused and neglected children that has been reported to state child protective services agencies.

According to the ACYF, in Child Maltreatment 2006 (2008, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm06/cm06.pdf), in 2006 an estimated 3.3 million children were alleged to have been abused or neglected and approximately 905,000 children were found to be victims of child maltreatment. Reports most often came from professional sources, such as educators (16.5%), the legal system (15.8%), social service employees (10%), and medical professionals (8.4%), and less often from nonprofessional sources, such as relatives (7.8%), parents (6%), friends and neighbors (5.3%), and a small percentage of the victims themselves (0.6%) and perpetrators (0.1%). (See Figure 7.2.)

In 2006, 64.1% of reported victims suffered neglect, 16% were physically abused, 8.8% were sexually abused,

and 6.6% were emotionally or psychologically maltreated. (See Table 7.3.) The highest rate of victimization was among infants (24.4 per 1,000 children), followed by children aged one to three years (14.2 per 1,000), and children four to seven years of age (13.5 per 1,000). (See Figure 7.3.) The rate of occurrence decreased as the child's age increased.

The most tragic result of child maltreatment is death. The ACYF indicates that in 2006 an estimated 1,530 children died as a result of abuse or neglect. Children in the youngest age groups were the most likely to die of maltreatment; 78% of the children who died were three years old or younger.

The largest group of abusers were mothers acting alone (39.9%) followed by fathers acting alone (17.6%). (See Figure 7.4.) Abuse of children was overwhelmingly perpetrated by parents; only 10% of perpetrators were not parents. Parental abuse is probably the most devastating of all abuse, because child victims have absolutely no place to turn for help or support.

Missing Children

In the 1980s, as a result of several high-profile abductions and tragedies, the media focused public attention on the problem of missing children. Citizens became concerned and demanded action to address what appeared to be a national crisis. Attempting to discover the nature and

dimension of the problem, Congress passed the Missing Children's Assistance Act of 1984. The legislation mandated the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to conduct national incidence studies

to determine the number of juveniles who were “victims of abduction by strangers” and the number of children who were victims of “parental kidnapping.” The result was the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children (NISMART), the first of which was conducted in 1988, with the results published in 1990. The second and more recent NISMART was conducted mainly in 1999, with many of the data published in a series of reports in October 2002.

FAMILY ABDUCTIONS . According to Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak of the OJJDP, in Children Abducted by Family Members: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/02/index.html), a family abduction is “the taking or keeping of a child by a family member in violation of a custody order, a decree, or other legitimate custodial rights, where the taking or keeping involved some element of concealment, flight, or intent to deprive a lawful custodian indefinitely of custodial privileges.” In 1999, 203,900 children were victims of a family abduction. About half (53%) of these were abducted by biological fathers, and 25% by biological mothers. Most family-abducted children were not missing for long— 46% were gone less than a week, and only 21% were away a month or more. Nearly four out of 10 (42%) were abducted from a single-parent family. At the time the survey was done, 91% of the children had been returned, 6% had been located but not returned, and less than 1% had not been located or returned (there was no information on outcomes for 2% of cases).

NONFAMILY ABDUCTIONS . Even though far fewer children are abducted by strangers than by family members, the consequences are often far worse. Violence, the use of force or weapons, sexual assault, and murder are more prevalent in nonfamily abductions. David Finkelhor, Heather Hammer, and Andrea J. Sedlak of the OJJDP state in Nonfamily Abducted Children: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/03/index.html) that 58,200 children were abducted by nonfamily members in 1999. Nearly half (46%) of these were sexually assaulted by their abductors. Only 115 of the abductions were “stereotypical kidnappings,” in which a child was abducted by a slight acquaintance or stranger, detained overnight, transported 50 miles or more, held for ransom or with intention to keep permanently, or killed. Most nonfamily abducted children (59%) were15to17years old and 65% were female. The perpetrators were strangers 37% of the time and were three times as likely to be male as female. Most perpetrators (67%) were aged 13 to 29. Most nonfamily abducted children (91%) were away for 24 hours or less, and 99% returned alive. The remaining 1% were either killed or had not been located at the time of the survey.

RUNAWAYS AND THROWNAWAYS . In Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/04/), Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak note that runaways are children who meet at least one of the following criteria:

• A child who leaves home without permission and stays away overnight
• A child 14 years old (or older and mentally incompetent) who is away from home, chooses not to come home when expected to, and stays away overnight
• A child 15 years old or older who is away from home, chooses not to come home, and stays away two nights

In the 1970s the term throwaways or thrownaways was given by researchers to juveniles who were made to leave home or were abandoned. A thrownaway child meets one of the following criteria:

• A child who is asked or told to leave home by a parent or other household adult, with no adequate alternative care arranged for the child by a household adult, and who is out of the household overnight
• A child who is away from home and is prevented from returning home by a parent or other household adult, with no adequate alternative care arranged for by a household adult, and who is out of the household overnight

The OJJDP now combines its estimates of runaways and thrownaways. According to Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak, 1.7 million youths had a runaway/thrownaway episode in 1999. The runaway episode was thought to indicate that 1.2 million of these children were endangered in the following ways:

• The child had been physically or sexually abused at home in the year before the episode or was afraid of abuse upon return (21%)
• The child was substance dependent (19%)
• The child was 13 years old or younger (18%)
• The child was in the company of someone known to be abusing drugs (18%)
• The child was using hard drugs (17%)

Most runaway/thrownaway youth (68%) were 15 years old or older, and half were females. Most runaways (77%) were away less than one week, and more than 99% returned. An estimated 38,600 of the runaways were at risk of sexual endangerment (assault, attempted assault, or prostitution) while away from home.

Murder Victims

According to the BJS, homicide rates for all age groups have been declining since the mid-1990s. (See Figure 7.1.) Even though violent crime has diminished, it still plays a significant role as a cause of death for youth. However, Melonie P. Heron et al. of the CDC indicate in “Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2006” (National Vital Statistics Report, vol. 56, no. 16, June 11, 2008) that in 2006 the leading cause of death among both males and females under the age of 24 was accidents. Of the leading causes of death in 2006, homicides and suicides accounted for many abbreviated lives as well, and these deaths increased in number among older youth.

The homicide death rate for infants under age one was quite high at 6.8 per 100,000 in 2006. After that age, the homicide death rate declined to 2.1 per 100,000 among one- to four-year-olds and 1 per 100,000 five- to 14-year-olds. The homicide death rate rose again after age 14.

UCR data confirm that murder victims are disproportionately young people. Out of 14,831 murder victims in 2007, 1,554 victims were under age 18, including 1,070 males and 482 females. (See Table 7.4.) The number of young murder victims more than doubled when looking at all victims aged 21 and under. Of the 3,758 murder victims in this age range, 2,996 were male and 758 were female. One out of 10 (10.5%) murder victims was under age 18, and a quarter (25.3%) was under age 22.

African-Americans are also disproportionately victims of homicide. Nearly equal numbers of whites (6,948) and African-Americans (7,316) were murdered in 2007, even though whites far outnumber African-Americans in the general population, according to the U.S. Census Bureau (April 30, 2008, http://www.census.gov/popest/national/asrh/NC-EST2007-asrh.html). (See Table 7.4.) Of victims under age

18, 752 were white and 740 were African-American. One out of 10 (10.8%) white victims as well as one out of 10 (10.1%) African-American victims were under age 18; 22.9% of white victims and 27.8% of African-American victims were under age 22. Homicide has been and is the leading cause of death for African-American teenagers, both male and female, although victimization rates for African-American teens declined dramatically between the early 1990s and 2000.

VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIP . Snyder and Sickmund state that the most frequent killers of children under age six were their parents, whereas parents were less likely to be involved in the murder of teens aged 15 to 17, although this varied by gender of the child. (See Table 7.5.) Almost two-thirds (61%) of all female juveniles killed were murdered by a parent or stepparent, compared to only 26% of male juveniles. Half (50%) of all male juveniles killed were murdered by an acquaintance, compared to only 29% of female juveniles. Females were also less likely than males to be murdered by a stranger (3% and 18%, respectively).

The risk of being killed by a parent decreased with age—62% of murder victims aged five and younger were killed by a parent or stepparent, compared to 40% of children aged six to 11, 11% of children aged 12 to 14, and 3% of children aged 15 to 17. (See Table 7.5.) The risk of being killed by an acquaintance or a stranger, however, increased with age. About a quarter (28%) of children under age six were killed by an acquaintance, compared to 66% of 15- to 17-year-olds; only 3% of the youngest children were killed by strangers, compared to 25% of 15- to 17-year-olds.

WEAPONS USED IN MURDERS OF JUVENILES . According to Snyder and Sickmund, the number of youths dying as a result of firearms increased 152% between 1985 and 1993 before declining. Even though the number of homicides involving no firearm declined very little between 1993 and 2002, a huge drop in the number of homicides involving a firearm resulted in the overall number of juvenile homicides falling to the lowest level since 1984 in 2002. Nonetheless, almost half (48%) of all juveniles murdered in 2002 were killed with a firearm. Another 22% were beaten/kicked to death or strangled, and 11% were killed with a knife or blunt object. The remaining 19% were killed with another type of weapon, or the type of weapon used was unknown.

The FBI reports that these trends continued in 2007; firearms were used in most murders of juveniles and young adults in that year. Of 1,554 murder victims under the age of 18, 806 (51.9%) were killed with firearms. (See Table 7.6.) Of 3,758 murder victims who were under the age of 22, 2,642 (70.3%) were killed with firearms. A low proportion of the youngest murder victims were killed by firearms, but that proportion rose with age. The most firearms-related murders were in the 20 to 24 age group (2,733 deaths). However, the greatest percentage of firearms-related murders was among those aged 17 to 19 (1,229 of 1,443 murders, or 85.2%). Other weapons most frequently used to kill juveniles included personal weapons—hands, feet, fists, and so on, especially among the youngest children—and knives.

Rape

For several reasons, the statistics on rape are incomplete. The crime often goes unreported. The BJS estimates that only about one-third of the cases of completed or attempted rape are ever reported to police; other organizations estimate that the proportion of reported rapes is even lower. Because its data are collected through interviews, the BJS recognizes an underreporting in its statistics as well. Acquaintance rape is far more common than stranger rape. Most experts conclude that in 80% to 85% of all rape cases, the victim knows the rapist.

The UCR defines forcible rape as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Assaults and attempts to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included; however, statutory rape (without force) [sex with a consenting minor] and other sex offenses are excluded.” Rape is a crime of violence in which the victim may suffer serious physical injury and long-term psychological pain. In 2007 the UCR recorded 90,427 reported rape offenses, a decrease of 2.5% from the year before. The rate of forcible rapes was reported at a rate of 59.1 offenses per 100,000 females.

Rape victims are disproportionately young. According to the BJS, in 2006 females aged 12 to 15 experienced the highest rates (6.4 per 1,000 people), followed by older teens aged 16 to 19 (4.3 per 1,000 people). (See Table 7.7.) Furthermore, the BJS finds that in 2006 only 33.9% of those aged 12 to 19 who acknowledged being victims of rape/sexual assault reported the incident to police. (See Table 7.8.)

Aggravated and Simple Assault

In Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2006 Statistical Tables (August 2008, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus06.pdf), the BJS reports that in 2006 aggravated assault was most common among young people. It occurred at a rate of 8.3 per 1,000 teens aged 12 to 15, 11.6 per 1,000 teens aged 16 to 19, and 11.9 per 1,000 teens aged 20 to 24. After that age the rate began to decline. Among white males, those aged 20 to 24 experienced the highest rate of aggravated assault (12.2 per 1,000 people), whereas among African-American males, 25- to 34-year-olds experienced the highest rate (31 per 1,000 people). (See Table 7.9.) African-American women in the 20 to 24 age group experienced the highest rate (16.1 per 1,000 people) as did white women in the 20 to 24 age group (11.7 per 1,000 people).

The BJS notes that in 2006 simple assault occurred at a rate of 31.3 per 1,000 teens aged 12 to 15, 33.1 per 1,000 teens aged 16 to 19, and 23.2 per 1,000 teens aged 20 to 24, after which the rate began to decline. Younger African-American males had a higher simple assault victimization rate than did white males in the same age group. For example, African-American males aged 16 to 19 had a simple assault rate of 46.8 per 1,000 people, compared to the rate of 26.9 among white males of that age. (See Table 7.9.)

Robbery and Theft

The BJS reports in Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2006 Statistical Tables that in 2006 robbery occurred at a rate of 4 per 1,000 teens aged 12 to 15, 4.6 per 1,000 teens aged 16 to 19, and 7.3 per 1,000 teens aged 20 to 24, after which age the rate began to decline. Young males, both white and African-American, had high rates of robbery victimization. (See Table 7.9.)

Chapter 7
Juvenile Crime and Victimization

THE UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS AND THE NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY

Two main government sources collect crime statistics. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) compiles the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) annually. The FBI reports in Crime in the United States 2005 (September 2006, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/index.html) that the UCR, which was begun in 1930, now collects data from nearly seventeen thousand city, county, and state law enforcement agencies.

The second set of crime statistics is the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which is prepared by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). Established in 1972, the survey is an annual federal statistical study that measures the levels of victimization resulting from criminal activity in the United States. The BJS notes in "BJS Criminal Victimization Data Collections" (December 10, 2006, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm#Programs) that the survey collects data from a nationally representative sample of 77,200 households each year, which contain about 134,000 people, on the "frequency, characteristics and consequences of criminal victimization." The survey was previously known as the National Crime Survey, but it was renamed and redesigned in 1992 to emphasize the measurement of victimization experienced by citizens. The survey was created because of a concern that the UCR did not fully portray the true volume of crime. The UCR provides data on crimes reported to law enforcement authorities, but it does not estimate how many crimes went unreported.

The NCVS is designed to complement the UCR. It measures the levels of criminal victimization of people and households for the crimes of rape, robbery, assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and larceny. Murder is not included because the NCVS data are gathered through interviews with victims. Definitions for these crimes are the same as those established by the UCR.

Some observers believe the NCVS is a better indicator of the volume of crime in the United States than the UCR. Nonetheless, like all surveys, it is subject to error. The survey depends on people's memories of incidents that happened up to six months earlier. Many times, a victim is not sure what happened, even moments after the crime occurred. In addition, the NCVS limits the data to victims aged twelve and older, an admittedly arbitrary age selection.

CRIME TRENDS

Violent and Property Crimes

Shannan M. Catalano of the NCVS reports in Criminal Victimization, 2005 (September 2006, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv05.pdf) that in 2005 U.S. residents experienced about 23 million violent and property victimizations. Of these crimes, 18 million were property crimes (burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft), 5.2 million were violent crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault), and 227,000 were personal thefts (pocket picking and purse snatching). The rate of theft was down from the year before, but the rate of every other type of crime remained unchanged.

Catalano notes that between 2002 and 2003 and between 2004 and 2005 the average yearly rate of violent crimes per 1,000 people aged twelve or older remained essentially unchanged for all age groups except for sixteen-to nineteen-year-olds. Among this age group, 55.6 per 1,000 people were victims of violent crimes between 2002 and 2003; this rate declined to 45 per 1,000 people between 2004 and 2005, a 19% decrease. Even though violent crimes for the most part remained stable between 2004 and 2005, between 1993 and 2005 the violent crime rate was down 58%.

The UCR reports that most violent crimes—including murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault—remained fairly steady between 2004 and 2005, except for forcible rape, which decreased 1.2% between 2004 and 2005. The UCR also records decreasing violent crime rates over time. The violent crime rate had decreased from 620.1 per 100,000 people in 1986 to 469.2 per 100,000 in 2005.

According to the UCR, there were an estimated 10.2 million property crimes, including burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft, in 2005. Property crime rates decreased by 1.5% between 2004 and 2005. This decline continued a long-term trend; property crime rates in 2005 were down 13.9% from 1996. In 2005 the property crime rate was 3,429.8 per 100,000 people, compared with a rate of 4,881.8 per 100,000 in 1986.

Trends in Juvenile Crime

According to the FBI, from the mid-1980s through the mid-1990s youth violence and crime grew at rapid rates. In Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report (March 2006, http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/nr2006/downloads/NR2006.pdf), Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund of the National Center for Juvenile Justice examine juvenile homicide trends. They find that between 1980 and 1997 murders by juveniles were highest in 1993 and 1994. In murders involving juvenile offenders during this eighteen-year span, most involved a lone offender, but 39% featured two or more offenders.

The surge in youth crime and violence caused much concern in society. Various groups—both public and private—undertook the mission of trying to uncover the reasons juvenile crime was on the rise. Lawmakers responded by toughening existing laws and finding ways to try more juveniles as adults. Courts levied stricter sentences, and parents and educators looked into various programs and methods geared to help their children and students deal with the situation.

However, the rise in juvenile crime did not last. Snyder and Sickmund note that in the ten-year period between 1994 and 2003, juvenile arrests decreased by 18%, compared with a 1% increase in arrests of adults during the same period. The arrest rate of juveniles for murder in 2003 was the lowest since at least 1980. Snyder and Sickmund state that "the juvenile violent crime wave predicted by some in the mid-1990s has not occurred."

JUVENILE OFFENDERS

For some young people, their teenage and young adult years are difficult and challenging times. Even though their peers are playing baseball, going to proms, singing in the school choir, heading to college, and making plans for the future, some juveniles and youths are, for whatever reason, committing crimes. When dealing with young offenders, each state has its own definition of the term juvenile: Most states put the upper age limit at seventeen years old, although some states set it as low as fourteen years old. When reporting its national crime statistics, the FBI considers those under the age of eighteen to be juveniles. The FBI often breaks its juvenile crime statistics into age-based subcategories, such as age sixteen or older and age fifteen or younger, to demonstrate how juvenile offenses vary with age. The FBI does the same with youth, who are often defined as ages eighteen to twenty-four. However, some organizations and studies classify youth age ranges differently, citing youths as those ages eighteen to twenty-one or ages eighteen to twenty-five.

The U.S. Department of Justice defines crime as all behaviors and acts for which society provides formally approved punishments. Written law, both federal and state, defines which behaviors are criminal and which are not. Some behaviors—murder, robbery, and burglary—have always been considered criminal. Other actions, such as domestic violence or driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, became classified as criminal actions more recently. Other changes in society have also influenced crime. For example, the widespread use of computers provides new opportunities for white-collar cybercrime, including identity theft and the malicious spread of computer viruses and worms.

Crime can range from actions as simple as taking a candy bar from a store without paying for it, to those as severe and violent as murder. Most people have broken some law, wittingly or unwittingly, at some time in their lives. Therefore, the true extent of criminality is impossible to measure. Researchers can only keep records of what is reported by victims or known to the police.

Risk Factors for Youth Violence

Various government entities, schools, student and parent organizations, and research groups have devoted countless hours to the issue of youth violence. One of their goals is to find ways to recognize the potential for violent behavior in youth before it becomes a serious problem. They work individually and sometimes collectively to outline trends in youth violence and to determine what factors lead to violent behavior.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in "Youth Violence: Fact Sheet" (April 19, 2007, http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/yvfacts.htm), outlines risk factors that increase the likelihood that a young person will become violent. These factors include individual risk factors, such as a history of violent victimization, certain mental health problems, substance abuse, emotional distress, and exposure to violence within the family; family risk factors, including parenting styles that are authoritarian, harsh, inconsistent, lax, or parental substance abuse or criminality; peer/school risk factors, including involvement in gangs or with delinquent peers, social rejection, and poor school performance; and community risk factors, including a high concentration of poverty, family disruption, transiency, and social disorganization. Factors that make it less likely that a young person will engage in criminal or violent behavior (protective factors) include intelligence, positive social interactions, connectedness to family and other adults, consistent parental involvement, and a commitment to school.

In "Warning Signs of Youth Violence" (2004, http://www.apahelpcenter.org/featuredtopics/feature.php?id=38&ch=3), the American Psychological Association lists immediate signs that youth violence is a serious possibility as well as signs over a period of time that indicate a potential for violence. Signs that violence may be imminent include a frequent loss of temper or physical fighting, vandalism, an increase in substance use or risk-taking behavior, development of plans to commit violence, enjoying hurting animals, or carrying a weapon. The potential for violence exists when a young person has a history of aggressive behavior or substance abuse, has a strong desire to be in a gang or gang membership, has a fascination with weapons, begins to withdraw from friends and usual activities, performs poorly in school, fails to respect the feelings or rights of others, or has a history of discipline problems.

In response to the Columbine High School shootings in 1999, the U.S. Surgeon General began a comprehensive study of the status of youth and violence in the nation. Issued in 2001, Youth Violence: A Report of theSurgeon General (http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence/) addresses many aspects of crime and violence, including risk factors for violence among youth aged fifteen to eighteen. The report contains detailed information on early onset factors (ages six to eleven), which include exposure to violence on television and substance abuse, as well as late onset factors (ages twelve to fourteen), which include aggression in general, antisocial attitudes, and abusive parents.

Those involved in the study of youth violence are quick to point out, however, that people need to be cautious when reacting to someone exhibiting warning signs. Although it is important to provide help to youth with violent tendencies, harm could be caused by mislabeling a student as being violent or by overreacting to a set of circumstances.

Juvenile violent behavior is more likely to occur at certain times of day than at other times. Snyder and Sickmund find that violent crime, including murder, violent sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault, is most likely to be committed in the after school hours on school days for juvenile offenders, peaking around 3 p.m. In comparison, adult offenders are most likely to commit violent crimes between 9 p.m. and midnight. (See Figure 7.1.) These findings point out the relative ineffectiveness of some measures meant to curtail youth violence, especially the adoption of curfews. (See Chapter 10.)

Homicide

The UCR defines murder and nonnegligent manslaughter as "the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human being by another." The figures do not include "deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder or assaults to murder, which are scored as aggravated assaults." According to the UCR, approximately 16,692 murders occurred in 2005. Although this represented a 3.4% increase from 2004, murders were down about 15% in the United States since 1996.

Over 17,000 people were identified as murder offenders in 2005, including 866 males and 76 females under the age of eighteen, and 3,322 males and 284 females under the age of twenty-two. (See Table 7.1.) Because the identity of all murder offenders is not known, such figures are lower than they would be if all offenders had been identified. Those under age eighteen represented only 6% of all murder offenders in that year, whereas those under age twenty-two represented 21% of all murder offenders. Fewer than one out of ten of all known murderers were female; 92% of all murder offenders under age eighteen and 92% of all murder offenders under age twenty-two were males. Arrests of youth under age eighteen for murder rose 19.9% between 2004 and 2005.

In 2005, 32% of all murderers were known to be white, over 37% were African-American, and almost 29% were of unknown race. (See Table 7.1.) These proportions were similar for juvenile murderers. Among youth under age eighteen, 552 murder offenders were African-American (58%), 356 were white (38%), and 5 were unknown (0.5%). Among youth under age twenty-two, 2,084 were African-American (58%), 1,382 were white (38%), and 30 were unknown (0.8%).

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS KILLED

In Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2005 (October 2006, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2005/), the UCR provides statistics on the number of law enforcement officers feloniously killed between 1996 and 2005. During this ten-year period 662 officers were killed—the highest number (85) occurred in 1996. In 2005, 57 officers were feloniously killed. Youth under age eighteen were responsible for 6% of the officers killed in the decade, whereas young adults aged eighteen to twenty-four were responsible for over a third (38.9%) of the murders.

Rape

The UCR reports in Crime in the United States 2005 that even though there were an estimated 93,934 forcible rapes reported in 2005, only 18,733 people were arrested for rape in that year. Rape is one of the most underreported crimes, and the low arrest rate demonstrates how few perpetrators are caught. Of those arrested for rape, 5.6% were under age fifteen, 15.4% were under age eighteen, and 29.8% were under age twenty-one.

Aggravated and Simple Assault

The UCR defines aggravated assault as "an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury…. This type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by other means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Attempted aggravated assault that involves the display of—or threat to use—a gun, knife, or other weapon is included in this crime category because serious personal injury would likely result if the assault were completed." In 2005 an estimated 862,947 aggravated assaults were reported. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 331,469 people were arrested for aggravated assault in that year. Of that number, 4.7% were under age fifteen, 13.6% were under age eighteen, and 24.8% were under age twenty-one.

By contrast, simple assaults are assaults or attempted assaults not involving a weapon and not resulting in serious injury to the victim. These include acts such as assault and battery, resisting or obstructing the police, hazing, and so on. In its arrest reports, the UCR lists a category called "other assaults" (to differentiate between these types of assaults and aggravated assaults). The UCR notes that 958,477 people were arrested for other assaults in 2005. Of that number, 7.8% were under age fifteen, 19% were under age eighteen, and 28.7% were under age twenty-one.

Robbery, Burglary, and Theft

Robbery, burglary, and larceny-theft are different crimes under the UCR. Robbery is the taking of something from a person or people with force, the threat of force, or by instilling fear in a victim. Burglary involves the unlawful entry, not requiring force, into a building to commit a felony or theft. Larceny-theft is the unlawful taking of property without using force, including crimes such as shoplifting, pocket picking, purse snatching, thefts from motor vehicles, thefts of motor vehicle parts and accessories, bicycle thefts, and so on. These offenses, taken together, are disproportionately committed by young people.

In 2005 the UCR estimates that 417,122 robbery offenses had been committed, an increase of 3.9% over the previous year. However, robbery offenses had decreased by 22.1% from ten years earlier. In 2005, 85,309 people were arrested for robbery; those arrested were disproportionately young people. Of that number, 5.8% were under age fifteen, 25.2% were under age eighteen, and 46.3% were under age twenty-one.

In 2005 the UCR recorded 2,154,126 burglary offenses, an increase of 0.5% from the previous year but a 14.1% decline from ten years earlier. Burglary has a particularly low arrest rate. The UCR notes that 220,391 people were arrested for burglary in 2005. Of that number, 8.7% of perpetrators were under age fifteen, 26.1% were under age eighteen, and 43.9% were under age twenty-one.

In 2005 the UCR recorded 6.8 million larceny-theft offenses, a decrease of 2.3% from 2004 and a 14.3% decline from ten years earlier. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 854,856 people were arrested for larceny-theft in 2005. Of that number, 9% of perpetrators were under age fifteen, 25.7% were under age eighteen, and 40.2% were under age twenty-one.

Motor-vehicle theft is also disproportionately perpetrated by young people, usually in urban areas. In 2005 there were an estimated 1.2 million motor vehicle thefts nationwide. More than nine out of ten (93.3%) motor vehicle thefts occurred in metropolitan areas. In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that 108,301 people were arrested for motor-vehicle theft in 2005. Of those arrested, 5.9% were under age fifteen, 25.5% were under age eighteen, and 42.8% were under age twenty-one.

Computer Crime

Illegally accessing a computer, known as hacking, is a crime committed frequently by juveniles. When it is followed by manipulation of the information of private, corporate, or government databases and networks, it can be quite costly. Another means of computer hacking involves creation of what is known as a virus program. The virus program is one that resides inside another program and then is activated by some predetermined code to create havoc in the host computer. Virus programs can be spread either through the sharing of disks and programs or through e-mail.

Cases of juvenile hacking have been reported since the 1980s. In 1998 the U.S. Secret Service filed the first criminal case against a juvenile for a computer crime. The unnamed hacker shut down the Worcester, Massachusetts, airport in 1997 for six hours. The airport was integrated into the Federal Aviation Administration traffic system by telephone lines. The accused gained access to the communication system and disabled it by sending a series of computer commands that changed the data carried on the system. As a result, the airport could not function. (No accidents occurred during that time, however.) According to the Department of Justice, the juvenile pled guilty in return for two years' probation, a fine, and community service.

Other types of computer crime typically perpetrated by juveniles include trading stolen credit card numbers and pirating of computer software to be sold. Because of computer networks, juveniles and other perpetrators can commit these types of crimes on a large scale. In "It's Not Just Fun and 'War Games'—Juveniles and Computer Crime" (April 26, 2005, http://www.cybercrime.gov/usamay2001_7.htm), Joseph V. DeMarco, the assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, states that "the enormous computing power of today's PCs make it possible for minors to commit offenses which are disproportionately serious to their age." Teens can commit property offenses on a large scale using computers, can portray themselves as adults in an online world, and "appear to have an ethical 'deficit' when it comes to computer crimes." He points out that children and teens who would never commit robbery, burglary, or assault may in fact commit online crimes.

Illegal Drug Use

Various studies show that many violent offenders are substance abusers. For some people, drugs and alcohol may cause violent tendencies to surface. In Monitoring the Future: National Results on Adolescent Drug Use, Overview of Key Findings, 2005 (April 2006, http://www.drugabuse.gov/PDF/overview2005.pdf), University of Michigan researchers Lloyd D. Johnston et al. find that in 2005, 38.4% of twelfth graders, 29.8% of tenth graders, and 15.5% of eighth graders had used an illicit drug in the past year. Among twelfth graders, marijuana/hashish use was highest (33.6%), followed by narcotics (9%), amphetamines (8.6%), barbiturates (7.2%), and tranquilizers (6.8%). (See Table 4.11 in Chapter 4.) More than two-thirds (68.6%) had used alcohol in the past twelve months.

Other drugs gaining popularity in recent years included so-called club drugs, such as ecstasy (MDMA), flunitrazepam (known as the date-rape drug), GHB, and ketamine. These drugs have been popular among teenagers at dance clubs and raves. Because each of these club drugs is scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act (Title II of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970), they are illegal and their use constitutes a criminal offense. In 2005, 3% of high school seniors had used MDMA in the previous twelve months. (See Table 4.11 in Chapter 4.)

In its arrest reports, the UCR notes that nearly 1.4 million people were arrested on drug abuse violations in 2005. Of that number, 1.7% were under age fifteen, 10.4% were under age eighteen, and 27.7% were under age twenty-one.

JUVENILE VICTIMS OF CRIME

Figure 7.2 and Figure 7.3 outline the trends in non-fatal violent victimizations and homicides by select age groups from about the mid-1970s to the mid-2000s. Between 1973 and 2005 the rate of violent victimizations dropped in all age categories, but especially among young people. In 1973 the violent victimization rate for those aged twelve to fifteen was 81.8 per 1,000 people in that age group. The rate peaked in 1994 at 118.6 per 1,000, then dropped steadily to 44 per 1,000 in 2005, its lowest point in the thirty-two years recorded. For those ages sixteen to nineteen, the rate in 1973 was 81.7. That group also reached its zenith in 1994 at 123.9 and then decreased steadily to 44.3 in 2005. The highest nonfatal violent victimization rate in 1973 was among twenty- to twenty-four-year-olds (87.6). This age group reached its highest point in 1991 at 103.6 and then fluctuated before dropping to 43.2 in 2004; however, it had risen again to 47.1 in 2005.

According to James Alan Fox and Marianne W. Zawitz, in Homicide Trends in the United States (June 2006, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/teens.htm), violent crime rates are highest for young people aged twenty-four and younger; after age twenty-five the violent victimization rate declines steadily. In 1973 sixteen-to nineteen-year-olds were about twice as likely to be victimized by violent crime as people thirty-five to forty-nine years of age; in 2005, they were about two and a half times as likely.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) notes that when someone is victimized as an adolescent, long-term consequences result. When compared with adults who were not victimized as adolescents, adults who were adolescent victims are most likely to have drug problems and more likely to perpetrate violence. (See Figure 7.4.) They are also more likely to commit acts of domestic violence and become victims of domestic violence than are adults who were not victimized as adolescents. In addition, they are nearly twice as likely to become victims of violent crime and nearly three times as likely to commit property offenses. Their risk of developing posttraumatic stress disorder is also twice as great.

Becoming a victim of crime can have serious consequences—outcomes that the victim neither asks for nor deserves. A victim rarely expects to be victimized and seldom knows where to turn for help. Victims may end up in the hospital to be treated and released, or they may be confined to bed for days, weeks, or longer. Injuries may be temporary, or they may be permanent and forever change the way the victim lives his or her life. Victims may lose money or property, or in the case of homicide may lose their lives. In many cases they lose their confidence, self-esteem, and feelings of security.

The effects of crime are not limited to the victim, however. A victim's family is frequently devastated, and the psychological trauma may affect everyone connected to a victim. Victims and their families may experience feelings of fear, anger, shame, self-blame, helplessness, and depression—emotions that can scar life and health for years after the event. Those who were attacked in their home or whose home was entered illegally may no longer feel secure anywhere. They often blame themselves, feeling that they could have handled themselves better, or done something differently to prevent being victimized.

In the aftermath of crime, when victims most need support and comfort, there is often no one available who understands. Parents or spouses may be dealing with their own feelings of guilt and anger for not being able to protect their loved ones. Friends may withdraw, not knowing what to say or do. As a result, victims may lose their sense of self-esteem and no longer trust other people. These effects of violent victimization can be particularly devastating when the victim is a young person.

Child Abuse and Neglect

It is impossible to determine how many children suffer abuse. All observers can do is count the number of reported cases—which include only those known to public authorities—or they can survey families, in which case parents may deny or downplay abuse. As a result, estimates of child abuse are generally considered low. The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System and its annual report, Child Maltreatment, is the primary source of national information on abused and neglected children that has been reported to state child protective services agencies.

Child Maltreatment 2004 (2006, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm04/cm04.pdf) reports that in 2004 an estimated three million children were alleged to have been abused or neglected and approximately 872,000 children were found to be victims of child maltreatment. Reports most often came from professional sources (such as educators), the legal system, social service employees, and medical professionals, and less often from nonprofessional sources, such as relatives, friends, neighbors, parents, the victims themselves, and a small percentage of perpetrators. (See Figure 7.5.)

In 2004, 62.4% of reported victims suffered neglect; 17.5% were physically abused; 9.7% were sexually abused; and 7% were emotionally or psychologically maltreated. (Figure 7.6 shows victimization rates for each group per 1,000 children.) The highest rate of victimization was among children three years of age or younger (16.1 per 1,000), followed by children four to seven years of age (13.4 per 1,000). (See Figure 7.7.) The rate of occurrence decreased as the child's age increased.

The most tragic result of child maltreatment is death. In 2004 an estimated 1,490 children died as a result of abuse or neglect. Children in the youngest age groups were most likely to die of maltreatment; 81% of the children who died were three years old or younger.

The largest group of abusers were mothers acting alone (38.8%), followed by fathers acting alone (18.3%). (See Figure 7.8.) Abuse of children was overwhelmingly perpetrated by parents; only 10.1% of perpetrators were not parents. Parental abuse is probably the most devastating of all abuse, as child victims have absolutely no place to turn for help or support.

Missing Children

In the 1980s, as a result of several high-profile abductions and tragedies, the media focused public attention on the problem of missing children. Citizens became concerned and demanded action to address what appeared to be a national crisis. Attempting to discover the nature and dimension of the problem, Congress passed the 1984 Missing Children's Assistance Act. The legislation mandated the OJJDP to conduct national incidence studies to determine the number of juveniles who were "victims of abduction by strangers" and the number of children who were victims of "parental kidnapping." The result was the National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children (NISMART), the first of which was conducted in 1988, with the results published in 1990. The second, more recent NISMART was conducted mainly in 1999, with most of the data published in a series of October 2002 reports.

FAMILY ABDUCTIONS

According to Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak, in Children Abducted by Family Members: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/02/index.html), a family abduction is "the taking or keeping of a child by a family member in violation of a custody order, a decree, or other legitimate custodial rights, where the taking or keeping involved some element of concealment, flight, or intent to deprive a lawful custodian indefinitely of custodial privileges." In 1999, 203,900 children were victims of a family abduction. About half of these (53%) were abducted by biological fathers, and 25% by biological mothers. Most family abducted children were not missing for long—46% were gone less than a week, and only 21% were away a month or more. Nearly half (42%) were abducted from a single-parent family. At the time the survey was done, 91% of the children had been returned, 6% had been located but not returned, and less than 1% had not been located or returned (there was no information on outcomes for 2% of cases).

NONFAMILY ABDUCTIONS

Although far fewer children are abducted by strangers than by family members, the consequences are often far worse. Violence, the use of force or weapons, sexual assault, and murder are more prevalent in nonfamily abductions. According to David Finkelhor, Heather Hammer, and Andrea J. Sedlak, in Nonfamily Abducted Children: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/03/index.html), 58,200 children were abducted by nonfamily members in 1999. Nearly half (46%) of these were sexually assaulted by their abductors. Only 115 of the abductions were "stereotypical kidnappings," in which a child was abducted by a slight acquaintance or stranger, detained overnight, transported fifty miles or more, held for ransom or with intention to keep permanently, or killed. Most nonfamily abducted children (59%) were fifteen to seventeen years old and 65% were female. The perpetrators were strangers 37% of the time and were three times as likely to be male as female. Most perpetrators (67%) were aged thirteen to twenty-nine. Most nonfamily abducted children (91%) were away for twenty-four hours or less, and 99% returned alive. The remaining 1% were either killed or had not been located at the time of the survey.

RUNAWAYS AND THROWNAWAYS

Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak note in Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and Characteristics (October 2002, http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/nismart/04/) that runaways are children who meet at least one of the following criteria:

• A child who leaves home without permission and stays away overnight
• A child fourteen years old (or older and mentally incompetent) who is away from home who chooses not to come home when expected to and who stays away overnight
• A child fifteen years old or older who is away from home who chooses not to come home and stays away two nights

In the 1970s the term throwaways or thrownaways was used by researchers for juveniles who were made to leave home or were abandoned. A thrownaway child meets one of the following criteria:

• A child who is asked or told to leave home by a parent or other household adult, with no adequate alternative care arranged for the child by a household adult, and who is out of the household overnight
• A child who is away from home who is prevented from returning home by a parent or other household adult, with no adequate alternative care arranged for by a household adult, and who is out of the household overnight

The OJJDP now combines its estimates of runaways and thrownaways. According to Hammer, Finkelhor, and Sedlak in Runaway/Thrownaway Children, in 1999, 1.7 million youths had a runaway/thrownaway episode. The runaway episode was thought to indicate that 1.2 million of these children were endangered in the following ways:

• The child had been physically or sexually abused at home in the year before the episode or was afraid of abuse upon return (21%).
• The child was substance dependent (19%).
• The child was thirteen years old or younger (18%).
• The child was in the company of someone known to be abusing drugs (18%).
• The child was using hard drugs (17%).

Most runaway/thrownaway youth (68%) were fifteen years old or older; half were females and half were males. Most runaways (77%) were away less than one week, and more than 99% returned. An estimated 38,600 of the runaways were at risk of sexual endangerment—assault, attempted assault, or prostitution—while away from home.

Murder Victims

According to the BJS, homicide rates for all age groups have been declining since the mid-1990s. (See Figure 7.3.) Although violent crime has diminished, it still plays a significant role as a cause of death for youth. In 2003, however, the leading cause of death among both males and females under the age of twenty-four was accidents. Of the leading causes of death, homicides and suicides accounted for many abbreviated lives as well, and these deaths increase in number among older youth. (See Table 7.2.)

In 2003 the homicide death rate for infants under age one was quite high at 8.5 per 100,000. After that age, the homicide death rate declined to 2.4 per 100,000 among one-to four-year-olds and 0.8 per 100,000 five- to fourteen-year-olds. The homicide death rate rose again after age fourteen; the homicide death rate was 13 per 100,000 for fifteen- to twenty-four-year-olds, higher than any other age group. (See Table 7.2.)

UCR data confirm that murder victims are disproportionately young people. Out of 14,860 murder victims in 2005, 1,446 victims were under age eighteen, including 1,019 males and 422 females. (See Table 7.3.) The number of murder victims more than doubled for those under age twenty-two. Of the 3,605 murder victims in this age range, 2,912 were male and 688 were female. Even though nearly one out of ten (9.7%) murder victims was under age eighteen, almost a quarter (24.3%) was under age twenty-two.

African-Americans are also disproportionately victims of homicide. Nearly equal numbers of whites (7,133) and African-Americans (7,125) were murdered in 2005, even though whites far outnumber African-Americans in the general population. (See Table 7.3.) Of victims under age eighteen, 716 were white and 670 were African-American. Of victims under age twenty-two, 1,599 were white and 1,860 were African-American. African-American and white murder victims under age eighteen each represented approximately 10% of the total, whereas white victims under age twenty-two encompassed 22.4% of the total white victims and African-American victims under age twenty-two were 26.1% of the total African-American victims. Homicide has been and is the leading cause of death for African-American teenagers, both male and female, although victimization rates for African-American teens declined dramatically between the early 1990s and 2000.

VICTIM-OFFENDER RELATIONSHIP

Table 7.4 shows that between 1980 and 2002 the most frequent killers of children under age six were their parents, whereas parents were rarely involved in the murder of teens aged fifteen to seventeen, although this varied by gender of the child. Almost two-thirds (61%) of all female juveniles killed were murdered by a parent or stepparent, compared with only 26% of male juveniles. Half of all male juveniles killed (50%) were murdered by an acquaintance, compared with only 29% of female juveniles. Females were also less likely than males to be murdered by a stranger (3% and 18%, respectively.)

The risk of being killed by a parent decreases with age. Sixty-two percent of murder victims aged five and younger were killed by a parent or stepparent, compared with 40% of children aged six to eleven, 11% of children aged twelve to fourteen, and 3% of children aged fifteen to seventeen. (See Table 7.4.) The risk of being killed by an acquaintance or a stranger, however, increased with age. About a quarter of children under age six (28%) were killed by an acquaintance, compared with 66% of fifteen- to seventeen-year-olds; only 3% of the youngest children were killed by strangers, compared with 25% of fifteen- to seventeen-year-olds.

WEAPONS USED IN MURDERS OF JUVENILES

Snyder and Sickmund report that the number of youths dying as a result of firearms increased 152% between 1985 and 1993 before beginning to decline. Even though the number of homicides involving no firearm declined little between 1993 and 2002, a huge drop in the number of homicides involving a firearm resulted in the overall number of homicides of juveniles falling to the lowest level since 1984 in 2002. Nonetheless, almost half of all juveniles murdered in 2002 (48%) were killed with a firearm. Another 22% were beaten/kicked to death or strangled, and 11% were killed with a knife or blunt object. The remaining 19% were killed with another type of weapon, or the type of weapon used was unknown.

The FBI reports that these trends continued in 2005; firearms were used in most murders of juveniles and young adults in that year. Of 1,446 murder victims under the age of eighteen, 720 (49.8%) were killed with firearms. (See Table 7.5.) Of 3,605 murder victims who were under the age of twenty-two, 9,244 (70.3%) were killed with firearms. A low proportion of the youngest murder victims were killed by firearms, but that proportion rose with age. The most firearm-related murders were in the twenty to twenty-four age group (2,269 deaths). However, the greatest percentage of firearm-related murders was among those aged seventeen to nineteen (83.7%). Other weapons most frequently used to kill juveniles included "personal" weapons—hands, feet, fists, and so on—and knives.

Rape

For several reasons, the statistics on rape are incomplete. The crime often goes unreported. The BJS estimates that only about one-third of the cases of completed or attempted rape are ever reported to police; other organizations estimate that the proportion of reported rapes is even lower. Because its data are collected through interviews, the BJS recognizes an underreporting in its statistics as well. Acquaintance rape is far more common than stranger rape. Most experts conclude that in 80% to 85% of all rape cases the victim knows the rapist.

In Crime in the United States 2005, the UCR defines forcible rape as "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. Assaults and attempts to commit rape by force or threat of force are also included; however, statutory rape (without force) [sex with a consenting minor] and other sex offenses are excluded." Rape is a crime of violence in which the victim may suffer serious physical injury and long-term psychological pain. The UCR indicates that in 2005 there were 93,934 reported rape offenses, a decrease of 1.2% from the year before. The rate of forcible rapes was reported at a rate of 62.5 offenses per 100,000 females.

Rape victims are disproportionately young. Catalano reports that rape/sexual assault in 2005 occurred at a rate of 1.2 per 1,000 twelve- to fifteen-year-olds and 3.2 per 1,000 sixteen- to nineteen-year-olds. NCVS data also include rapes committed against males. (See Table 7.6.) Females aged sixteen to nineteen experienced the highest rates (5.7 per 1,000). (See Table 7.7.)

The NCVS finds that in 2005 only 33.1% of those aged twelve to nineteen who acknowledged being victims of rape/sexual assault reported the incident to police. (See Table 7.8.)

Aggravated and Simple Assault

Catalano notes that in 2005 aggravated assault was most common among young people. It occurred at a rate of 8.7 per 1,000 twelve- to fifteen-year-olds, 9.7 per 1,000 sixteen-to nineteen-year-olds, and 10 per 1,000 twenty- to twenty-four-year-olds. After that age the rate began to decline. Among white males, those aged twenty to twenty-four experienced the highest rate (15.7 per 1,000), whereas among African-American males, sixteen- to nineteen-year-olds experienced the highest rate (16.3 per 1,000). The same pattern held among females; African-American women in the sixteen to nineteen age group experienced the highest rate (17.7 per 1,000), whereas white women in the twenty to twenty-four age group experienced the highest rate (4.9 per 1,000). (See Table 7.9.)

According to Catalano, in 2005 simple assault occurred at a rate of 30.6 per 1,000 twelve- to fifteen-year-olds, 24.2 per 1,000 sixteen- to nineteen-year-olds, and 30.3 per 1,000 twenty- to twenty-four-year-olds, after which the rate began to decline. Males had a higher rate of simple assault than females. White and African-American males had a similar rate of simple assault victimization. By contrast, young African-American females between the ages of twelve and fifteen had a significantly higher simple assault victimization rate than did white females in the same age group (34.3 per 1,000 and 21 per 1,000, respectively). (See Table 7.9.)

Robbery and Theft

Catalano reports that in 2005 robbery occurred at a rate of 3.5 per 1,000 twelve- to fifteen-year-olds, 7 per 1,000 sixteen- to nineteen-year-olds, and 5.5 per 1,000 twenty- to twenty-four-year-olds, after which age the rates began to decline. Young males, particularly young African-American males, had a high rate of robbery victimization. Among white males, those aged sixteen to twenty-four had a victimization rate of 8.8 per 1,000. Among African-American males aged sixteen to nineteen, the victimization rate was 29.5 per 1,000. (See Table 7.9.)

chapter 8
JUVENILE CRIME AND VICTIMIZATION

For some young people, growing up can be troubling. While their peers are playing football, going to proms, and making plans for adulthood, a certain percentage of juveniles, for whatever reason, have brushes with the law. Each state has its own definition of the term juvenile: most states put the upper age limit at seventeen years old, although some states set it as low as fourteen. In reporting national crime statistics, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) considers people under eighteen to be juveniles. The FBI often breaks its juvenile crime statistics down into age-based subcategories, such as sixteen or older and fifteen or younger, to demonstrate how juvenile offenses vary with age.

ARRESTS

According to Howard N. Snyder's "Juvenile Arrests 2001" (Juvenile Justice Bulletin, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, December 2003), in 2001 there were an estimated 2.3 million arrests of people under age eighteen. (See Table 8.1.) Juveniles made up 17% of all arrests and 15% of violent crime arrests. Property crimes—burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson—accounted for 21.6% of juvenile arrests; drug or liquor law violations accounted for 15%; violent crimes accounted for 4.2% of arrests; and the rest were for a wide variety of offenses including fraud, vandalism, prostitution, offenses against family and children, and vagrancy.

Beginning in the late 1980s and peaking in 1994, there was considerable growth in the number of arrests of juveniles for violent crimes. (See Figure 8.1.) After 1994 the number began to decline, falling 44% between 1994 and 2001. The 2001 juvenile violent crime arrest rate was the lowest it had been since 1983. The juvenile arrest rate for murder fell 70% between its peak in 1993 and 2001.

In 2000 juvenile arrests for property crimes were at the lowest level in more than two decades. (See Figure 8.2.) Among property crimes committed by juveniles, larceny-theft (which includes things like shoplifting, theft from motor vehicles, and bicycle theft) was the most common offense.

Arrests by Gender

Among youths under the age of nineteen, far more males than females are arrested for most types of juvenile crimes. In 2001 28% of all juvenile arrests involved females. (See Table 8.1.) Detailed arrest data available for 2002 show that 150,845 males and 98,016 females under eighteen years old were arrested for larceny-theft; 26,958 males and 5,586 females under eighteen were arrested for motor vehicle theft; 54,915 males and 6,928 females under eighteen were arrested for burglary; and 15,858 males and 2,961 females under eighteen were arrested for receiving, buying, or possessing stolen property. (See Table 8.2 and Table 8.3.) However, more females than males were arrested for running away (54,010 females versus 36,339 males), prostitution, and commercialized vice (729 females versus 366 males).

Girls ages thirteen to fifteen were involved in approximately one-third (33.1%) of all arrests of juveniles in that age group in 2002, and 26% of all arrests of juveniles ages sixteen to seventeen were girls. (See Table 8.2 and Table 8.3.) Between 1980 and 2001 the rate of arrests of juvenile females increased more than the rate for males, particularly for violent crimes. (See Figure 8.3.) The change in arrest rates between 1980 and 2001 for aggravated assault (113% versus 22%), simple assault (257% versus 109%), and weapons law violations (140% versus 16%) were all much higher for females than males.

Arrests by Race/Ethnicity

Table 8.4 shows arrest trends from 1980 to 2001 by offense and race. Asian and Pacific Islander juveniles had the lowest arrest rates in all offense categories. African-American youths accounted for a disproportionate share of juvenile arrests.

TABLE 8.1

DELINQUENCY COURT CASES

For statistical purposes, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) divides juvenile crimes into two general categories: delinquency offenses (acts that are illegal regardless of the age of the perpetrator) and status offenses (acts that are illegal only for minors, such as truancy, running away, curfew violations, ungovernability, and underage drinking).

Since the 1980s the justice system has implemented a variety of "tough-on-crime" policies, from which juvenile offenders are not exempt. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with a violation of criminal law, he or she becomes a delinquency case. When counting delinquency cases, one case can include more than one charge. For example, a youth brought in one time but on three different robbery charges is counted as one case. According to the OJJDP, juvenile courts handled an estimated 1.7 million delinquency cases in 1998 (the most recent year for which these statistics are available), a 44% increase over the 1989 caseload. In the same time period property offenses increased 11%, offenses against persons increased 88%, public order offenses increased 73%, and drug law violations increased 148%. Between 1994 and 1998 significant decreases occurred in several areas, including aggravated assault (22%), criminal homicide (36%), robbery (23%), and motor vehicle theft (28%).

Delinquency and Detention

Juvenile courts hear delinquency cases referred to them from law enforcement agencies, social service agencies,

FIGURE 8.1

schools, parents, probation officers, and victims. In 1997 (the most recent year of data available), law enforcement agencies accounted for 85% of all referrals.

One of the first decisions made in processing a delinquency case is whether the juvenile should be held in a detention facility between referral to the court and case disposition (the time a decision is reached). Detention may be necessary to protect the community from the juvenile, to ensure the juvenile's safety, to have the juvenile evaluated, or to ensure future court appearances. Between 1985 and 2000 the number of delinquency cases involving detention increased 41% (up by 95,200 cases). (See Figure 8.4.) Youths were held in detention facilities at some point between referral and disposition in 20% of all delinquency cases in 2000. In 2000 cases involving property were the least likely to result in detention (16%), while those involving crimes against a person were most likely to result in detention (24%). In the same year African-American youths (25%) were more likely than white youths (18%) to be held in detention.

Delinquency Case Processing

There is no national uniform procedure for processing juvenile delinquency cases, but cases generally follow similar paths. They are first screened by an intake department—the court, a state department of social services, or a prosecutor's office. A case may be handled either formally or informally.

When a case is to be handled formally, a petition must first be filed with the court (the offender is officially

FIGURE 8.2

charged with the offense). The court is asked for either an adjudicatory hearing (where a judge alone rules on the case) or waiver hearing (the juvenile court judge is asked to decide if the case should be waived to a criminal court where the youth will be tried as an adult).

A case is handled informally if the intake officer decides it will be resolved either by dismissing it for lack of evidence, referring it to a social services agency, imposing a fine or some form of restitution, or through informal probation.

Between 1985 and 2000 the number of delinquency cases that were handled formally increased 81%, although the delinquency caseload rose only 43%. In 2000 there were 36% more formal than informal delinquency cases. (See Figure 8.5.)

adjudication and disposition. If a youth is adjudicated delinquent, the juvenile court judge then makes a dispositional decision (imposes a sentence) that could include commitment to a residential facility, probation, referral to another agency or treatment program, fines, restitution, or community service. In 2000 formal probation was the most common outcome, ordered in 63% of adjudicated cases, an increase of 108% since 1985. (See Figure 8.6.) Almost one in four delinquents (24%) were sent to residential facilities, a 49% increase since 1985. Another 11% received other dispositions (sentences), including fines and restitution such as community service or enrollment in a nonresidential treatment or counseling program.

TABLE 8.2