This article asks whether genocide follows the age and gender distributions common to other crime. We develop and test a life‐course model of genocide participation to address this question using a new dataset of 1,068,192 cases tried in Rwanda's gacaca courts. Three types of prosecutions are considered: 1) inciting, organizing, or supervising violence; 2) killings and other physical assaults; and 3) offenses against property. By relying on systematic graphic comparisons, we find that the peak age of those tried in the gacaca courts was 34 years at the time of the genocide, which is older than the peak age for most other types of crime. We likewise find that women were more likely to participate in crimes against property and comparatively unlikely to commit genocidal murder. Symbolic–interactionist explanations of crime suggest people desist from crime as a result of shared understandings of the expectations of adulthood. We argue that this process may be turned on its head during genocide as participants may believe they are defending their communities against a perceived threat. Thus, in contrast to other criminological theories suggesting that people must desist from crime to be accorded adult status, some adults may participate in genocide to fulfill their duties as adult men.

More than one million people participated in the 1994 genocide against the Rwandan Tutsi. How did Rwanda, whose criminal justice infrastructure was decimated by the genocide, attempt to bring the perpetrators to justice? In this article, we provide the first analysis of the outcomes of the gacaca courts, a traditional community-based justice system that was greatly modified to address crimes of genocide. After briefly reviewing the creation of the National Service of Gacaca Jurisdictions, we explain the court process. Then, we present an overview of the outcomes of the courts with a focus on the specific sanctions given to those found guilty. This article provides the first systematic analysis of these sanctions, contributing both an empirical overview and new insights into how Rwanda attempted to bring justice to the many citizens who took part in the genocidal violence. We conclude by briefly highlighting some successes and failures of the gacaca system and its broader lessons for justice in other contexts.