U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Serious Juvenile Offending: Secure vs. Open Intervention

NCJ Number
151540
Journal
Lay Panel Magazine Volume: 32 Dated: (September 1994) Pages: 6-8
Author(s)
D Curran
Date Published
1994
Length
3 pages
Annotation
This research addresses the issue of serious juvenile offending in Northern Ireland, longitudinal aspects of juvenile offender careers, and offense seriousness in open and secure custodial settings.
Abstract
The research is based on a juvenile justice database which contains personal, social, and psychometric information on juvenile offenders, along with information on their criminal records. A sample of 592 male juvenile offenders was selected to analyze the most serious convictions prior to offender placement in training schools, differences in reconviction and reoffending trends after discharge from either open or secure custody, and patterns in prior offense seriousness and followup reconviction offense. Findings showed that juveniles with a previous history of violence or sexual offending had high levels of not being reconvicted at 1 and 3 years after discharge. The few juveniles in the previously violent category who were reconvicted did not tend to repeat violent offenses and were more likely to commit less serious offenses. Juveniles who were convicted of burglary, robbery, or theft were more likely to be reconvicted overall. Juvenile burglars and thieves were also more likely to commit similar offenses. Those convicted of criminal damage showed a relatively low level of reconviction at 1 and 3 years. About 89 percent of juvenile offenders who had reached adulthood were convicted of serious offenses as adults. Juvenile offenders in secure custody were reconvicted earlier and at a consistently higher rate than juveniles discharged from open custody. The author concludes that open custody should be the preferred option for most juvenile offenders where custody is deemed appropriate by a court.