This research examines how the public evaluates juvenile defendants tried in different venues and whether participants with different pretrial dispositions evaluate these juvenile defendants differently. In Study 1, 144 undergraduate students judge juveniles tried as adults more harshly than adult defendants or juveniles who were tried in the juvenile court. Prosecution-biased participants judge all defendants more harshly than defense-biased participants. In Study 2, 123 community residents are recruited. Findings of Study 1 are largely replicated. In addition, defense-biased participants are more likely than prosecution-biased participants to endorse the wayward youth stereotype instead of the superpredator stereotype of juvenile defendants. Implications for juvenile justice and further research on the evaluation of juvenile defendants and pretrial bias are discussed.
Beyer, M. (2006). Fifty delinquents in juvenile and adult court . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(2), 206-214.
2.
Bishop, D.M., Frazier, C.E., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & Winner, L. (1996). The transfer of juveniles to criminal court: Does it make a difference? Crime and Delinquency, 42, 171-191.
3.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1998). Juvenile felony defendants in criminal courts: State court processing statistics, 1990-94. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
4.
Cauffman, E., Piquero, A.R., Kimonis, E., Steinberg, L., Chassin, L., & Fagan, J. (2007). Legal, individual, and environmental predictors of court disposition in a sample of serious adolescent offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 31(6), 519-535.
5.
Chapdelaine, A., & Griffin, S. (1997). Beliefs of guilt and recommended sentence as a function of juror bias in the O. J. Simpson trial. Journal of Social Issues, 53(3), 477-485.
6.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
De La Fuente, L., De La Fuente, E., & Garcia, J. (2003). Effects of pretrial juror bias, strength of evidence and deliberation process on juror decisions: New validity evidence of the juror bias scale scores. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9(2), 197-209.
8.
Eigen, J.P. (1981). Punishing youth homicide offenders in Philadelphia . The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72(3), 1072-1093.
9.
Ghetti, S., & Redlich, A.D. (2001). Reaction to youth crimes: Perceptions of accountability and competency. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 33-52.
10.
Haegerich, T. (2002, March 8). The influence of stereotypes on individual and group decisions in a novel context: Juvenile defendants in court. Poster presented at the biennial conference of the American Psychology-Law Society, Austin, TX.
11.
Hamparian, D.M., Estep, L.K., Muntean, S.M., Priestino, R.R., Swisher, R.G., Wallace, P.L., et al. (1982). Major issues in juvenile justice information and training: Youths in adults courts: Between two worlds: Northeast Region . Columbus, OH: Academy for Contemporary Problems.
12.
Kassin, S.M., & Garfield, D.A. (1991). Blood and guts: General and trial-specific effects of videotaped crime scenes on mock jurors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(18), 1459-1472.
13.
Kassin, S.M., & Wrightsman, L.S. (1983). The construction and validation of a juror bias scale. Journal of Research in Personality , 17(4), 423-442.
14.
Kemmelmeier, M. (2005). The effects of race and social dominance orientation in simulated juror decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(5), 1030-1045.
15.
Kunda, Z., & Sinclair, L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes: Activation, application, and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 12-22.
16.
Lecci, L., & Myers, B. (2002). Examining the construct validity of the original and revised JBS: A cross-validation of sample and method. Law & Human Behavior, 26(4), 455-463.
17.
Levine, M., Williams, A., Sixt, A., & Valenti, R. (2001). Is it inherently prejudicial to try a juvenile as an adult? Behavioral Sciences and the Law: Special Issue: Youth Violence, 19(1), 23-31.
18.
Myers, B., & Lecci, L. (1998). Revising the factor structure of the juror bias scale: A method for the empirical validation of theoretical constructs. Law and Human Behavior, 22(2), 239-256.
19.
Myers, D.L. (2003). Adult crime, adult time: Punishing violent youth in the adult criminal justice system. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1(2), 173-197.
20.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2003). Delinquency cases waived to criminal court, 1990-1999. Washington, DC: Author.
21.
Puzzanchera, C.M. (2003). Delinquency cases waived to criminal court, 1990-1999. OJJDP Fact Sheet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
22.
Rainville, G.A., & Smith, S.K. (2003). Survey of 40 counties, 1998: Juvenile felony defendants in criminal courts. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report.
23.
Snyder, H.N. (2006). Juvenile arrests 2004. Juvenile Justice Bulletin . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
24.
Snyder, H.N., & Sickmund, M. (1995). Juvenile offenders and victims: A national report . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
25.
Strom, K.J., Smith, S.K., & Snyder, H.N. (1998). State court processing statistics, 1990-94: Juvenile felony defendants in criminal courts. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report.
26.
Tang, C.M., & Nunez, N. (2003). Effects of defendant age and juror bias on judgment of culpability: What happens when a juvenile is tried as an adult? American Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(1), 37-52.
27.
Thompson, C., & Dennison, S. (2004). Graphic evidence of violence: The impact on juror decision-making, the influence of judicial instructions and the effect of juror biases. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, 11(2), 323-337.
28.
Urbina, M.G. (2005). Transferring juveniles to adult court in Wisconsin: Practitioners voice their views. Criminal Justice Studies: A Critical Journal of Crime, Law & Society, 18(2), 147-172.
29.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). State and county quickfacts. Washington, DC: Author.
30.
Warling, D., & Peterson-Badali, M. (2003). The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: The effects of defendants age on trial outcomes. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 63-82.
