UNCOMMON DECISIONS - COMMON PROBLEMS (FROM DECISION-MAKING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM - REVIEWS AND ESSAYS, 1975, BY DON M GOTTEFREDSON - SEE NCJ-31371)

• NCJ Number: 55590
• Author(s): D M GOTTFREDSON
• Date Published: 1975
• Length: 12 pages
• Corporate Author: US Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

CRIMINAL JUSTICE DECISIONMAKING IN THE AREAS OF DELINQUENCY PREDICTION, PRETRIAL DETENTION AND RELEASE, JUVENILE PROBATION, COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL, AND POLICE USE OF DISCRETION IS DISCUSSED.

Abstract

RELATIVELY LOW VALIDITY, PROBLEMS OF GENERALIZATION FROM SAMPLES STUDIED TO OTHER POPULATIONS, AND INADEQUATE OR ABSENT CROSS-VALIDATION EVIDENCE ARE COMMON PROBLEMS IN PREDICTING DELINQUENCY. ANOTHER IS A LACK OF INFORMATION ON, OR ATTENTION TO, THE RELATIVE COSTS AND UTILITIES OF IDENTIFYING AND SEEKING TO FORESTALL DELINQUENCY IN A PREDICTED DELINQUENT IN RELATION TO THE POSSIBLE COSTS OF MISCLASSIFYING AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WILL NOT BECOME DELINQUENT. IN THE AREA OF DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT TO EMPLOY PREADJUDICATION DETENTION OF ALLEGEDLY DELINQUENT JUVENILES, A SYSTEMATIC STUDY OF EXPERIENCE WITH THESE DECISIONS, IDENTIFYING THE CRITERIA USED, AND ASSESSING THE RELATION OF THESE CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISION OUTCOMES IN TERMS OF THE LATER BEHAVIOR OF THE JUVENILES INVOLVED COULD PROVIDE THE INFORMATION NEEDED FOR HANDLING JUVENILES IN A LESS ARBITRARY MANNER IN DETENTION DECISIONS. A COMPUTERIZED AID TO JUVENILE PROBATION DECISIONMAKING USED IN A 4-YEAR PROJECT IN CALIFORNIA IS BRIEFLY CONSIDERED. THE MANHATTAN BAIL PROJECT, AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A MODEL FOR PRETRIAL RELEASE DECISIONS, IS DISCUSSED, ALONG WITH OTHER STUDY PROJECTS DESIGNED TO IDENTIFY CRITERIA FOR MAKING PREDICTIVE DECISIONS IN THE AREA OF PRETRIAL RELEASE. WHAT IS MOST NEEDED IS AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR USE IN MAKING THE DECISIONS AND THE SPECIFIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISIONS. IN DECISIONS REGARDING COMPETENCY TO STAND TRIAL, IT MUST BE RECOGNIZED THAT PSYCHIATRIC CATEGORIZATION OF AN ACCUSED MAY HAVE LITTLE OR NO BEARING ON COMPETENCY AS LEGALLY DEFINED. A STUDY IS MENTIONED WHICH HAS DEVELOPED PRINCIPLES FOR DETERMINING COMPETENCY WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF LENGTHY DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURES IN A HOSPITAL. AS A PRELUDE TO DISCUSSIONS IN SUBSEQUENT CHAPTERS, IT IS NOTED THAT POLICE HAVE GREATER DISCRETION IN DECISIONMAKING THAN ANY OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIAL. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)