NCJ Number
47321
Date Published
1977
Length
0 pages
Annotation
THE FILM EXAMINES THE CASES OF TWO JUVENILES CHARGED WITH SIMILAR OFFENSES WHO RECEIVE DIFFERENT RESPONSES FROM THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM; THE EFFECT OF KEY DECISIONMAKERS ON THE LIVES OF THE JUVENILES IS EXPLORED.
Abstract
THIS FILM IS AIMED TOWARD STUDENTS OF SOCIOLOGY AND CRIMINOLOGY, JUVENILE JUSTICE PRACTITIONERS, AND CONCERNED CIVIC GROUPS. ITS GOAL IS TO APPRAISE THE ISSUES OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AND TO PROVOKE DISCUSSION ABOUT THEM. THE TWO CASE STUDIES PRESENTED CONCERN LONNY AND TOMMY, BOTH 13-YEAR-OLD BURGLARS. LONNY, THE WHITE YOUTH, COMMITS TWO BURGLARIES WITHIN A BRIEF TIME SPAN. THE APPARENT LACK OF PARENTAL CONTROL WEIGHS HEAVILY IN THE JUDGE'S DECISION TO INCARCERATE LONNY. THE BOY'S FAMILY, A CHILD PSYCHOLOGIST, AND THE INSTITUTION'S WARDEN ALL BELIEVE THAT HE HAS EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS, AND THE PROFESSIONALS ARE PESSIMISTIC ABOUT HIS PROGNOSIS. TOMMY, A BLACK INNER-CITY YOUTH, IS SENTENCED TO AN INDEFINITE PERIOD OF PROBATION FOR HIS BURGLARY. HIS FAMILY HISTORY CONTRIBUTED TO THE JUVENILE JUDGE'S DECISION; SIX SIBLINGS AND BOTH PARENTS HAD PREVIOUS JUVENILE COURT RECORDS. THE BOY IS SURROUNDED BY NEGATIVE INFLUENCES. AGAIN, THE PROBATION OFFICER HAS A PESSIMISTIC FORECAST. THE RELEVANCE OF PARENTAL INFLUENCE AND PUNISHMENT OBJECTIVES IN THE SENTENCING DECISIONS ARE EXAMINED, AND THE FAIRNESS OF SUCH DECISIONS ARE QUESTIONED. THE COMMENTATOR CONCLUDES THAT NEITHER BOY IS EMOTIONALLY ILL OR DOOMED, ALTHOUGH EACH IS PORTRAYED AS SUCH BY THE PROFESSIONALS IN THE FILM. HOWEVER, HE URGES THAT METHODS BE FOUND TO KEEP JUVENILES OCCUPIED AND GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO SUCCEED. A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ARE RAISED BY THE COMMENTATOR IN THE FILM, AND AN INSTRUCTOR'S GUIDE IS PROVIDED TO AID IN DISCUSSION. (VDA)