Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of this publication may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Inquiries should be addressed to the publisher.
This book is a 1990 account of the ways in which young Aborigines were at a disadvantage before laws and legislation had been introduced, intended to improve their position. Aboriginal Youth and the Criminal Justice System focuses on South Australia, where detailed statistics are available, in a sophisticated analysis of the exact nature of the discrimination experienced by young Aborigines. Fay Gale, Rebecca Bailey-Harris and Joy Wundersitz examine the criminal justice system in operation; from the initial intervention by a police officer, through the process of screening and assessment to the final outcome - which all too often is a criminal record. The research clearly shows that at every point where discretion was exercised within this system, Aboriginal youths received the harsher option. Thus disadvantage is heaped on disadvantage until young Aboriginals were imprisoned at 23 times the rate of other young Australians. Even for those who escaped detention, participation in the criminal justice system was often such an ordeal that it became a form of punishment in itself. Discretion, though preferable to inflexible rules could operate against a group whose lifestyle and values differed from mainstream society.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of this publication may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Inquiries should be addressed to the publisher.
Motivated by growing doubts about the value of a welfare approach towards the processing of young offenders, law reformers in recent years have advocated a shift towards more traditional “justice” principles. This article examines the rhetoric of the “back to justice” trend in one Australian State, South Australia, where in 1976, a Royal Commission into juvenile justice argued in favour of a system which, at least at the adjudication stage, was based firmly on the notions of adversarial justice and due process. Central to this traditional approach is the trial where accused persons invoke their rights by pleading not guilty and putting the prosecution to the test. Yet, as this article demonstrates, the overwhelming majority of young persons in South Australia forego these rights by admitting the allegations made against them. Thus the rhetoric of adversarial justice and the Due Process Model is incompatible with the reality of the routine admission of guilt.
Motivated by growing doubts about the juvenile court's ability to deal effectively with young offenders, countries such as the United States and Australia have established informal treatment programs ostensibly designed to divert youths from formal court prosecution. Such programs, however, have been criticised on the grounds that, rather than fulfilling a diversionary function, they have widened the net of social control. By focusing on the two-tiered Panel system currently in operation in South Australia, this article presents inferential evidence that net-widening did occur after the introduction firstly, of Aid Panels in 1972 and secondly, of Screening Panels in 1979. However, in both instances, this net-widening was restricted to a relatively short time period, after which the numbers of youths selected for processing by the juvenile justice system stabilised.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.