(Download) "Confidence and Credibility: Magistrates and Youth Offending Teams Within the Youth Courts in England and Wales (Report)" by British Journal of Community Justice " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Confidence and Credibility: Magistrates and Youth Offending Teams Within the Youth Courts in England and Wales (Report)
- Author : British Journal of Community Justice
- Release Date : January 22, 2010
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 289 KB
Description
The role of Magistrates is to conduct trials, establish guilt or innocence, determine sentences, enforce court orders, make bail decisions, issue warrants and remand people to custody (Newburn, 2007). The role of YOTs is less clear, however, and they have struggled to establish and maintain a clear identity (Canton and Eadie, 2002). Although YOTs remain the sole service responsible for young offenders within England and Wales, there has been a continually moving agenda, from a primary focus upon welfare needs to a growing concern with enforcement (Thomas, 2008). In the past 10 years there has been an increasing focus on performance management and target setting which has resulted in YOTs becoming driven by procedural concerns rather than professional values. As Smith (2007) notes, National Standards (2004) have ensured that welfare issues have become further marginalised with a preoccupation with compliance with court orders. Souhami (2007) writes of the loss of occupational identity within youth justice, citing confusion about the goals and principles of youth justice work and how external influences affect the way YOTs operate. This article argues that, as a result, both the magistrates and their YOTs are mutually reinforcing local court cultures and outcomes which have become harsher and more punitive over time (Muncie, 2009). It concludes by arguing that if magistrates and YOTs can develop trust and confidence whilst remaining independent of each other's interests there is also the potential for better outcomes for some young people, with a reduced likelihood of further offending as a consequence. The term "better outcome" can be viewed as having two elements: firstly, sentences which the young person as well as the court believes will help prevent them from committing further offending or that the young person considers to be worthwhile (McGrath, 2009) and secondly, outcomes which do not damage the young person (Goldson, 2005, 2006). In essence this means limiting the use of custody, for both sentence and remand, in all but the most serious cases because of the substantial evidence concerning its damaging effects on children and young people (Bateman, 2005; Goldson, 2005; Goldson, 2006; Muncie, 2009).
 "Confidence and Credibility: Magistrates and Youth Offending Teams Within the Youth Courts in England and Wales (Report)" by British Journal of Community Justice " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}