ILNews

ICJI awards grant for study of juvenile courts

Rebecca Berfanger
November 15, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs professors at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis have received a $200,000 grant from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute to study the records of juvenile delinquents in Indiana to determine if juvenile court personnel treated defendants differently based on race, the school announced today.

IUPUI professors Crystal A. Garcia and Roger Jarjoura will examine decisions by juvenile court personnel on delinquency cases from 2005 through 2009 in all 91 Indiana county courts (Dearborn and Ohio counties share a court). They will review how juveniles were treated at various points in the system.

Jarjoura and Garcia plan to have their preliminary findings ready as early as April 2011, Garcia said, according to a statement from the school.

“We want to answer the question: Are kids of color dealt with differently? In other words, are court actors treating kids fairly?” Garcia said in a statement.

“This is important work that benefits the state of Indiana, and that’s what we're all about. And no one is more qualified to do this work than Crystal and Roger,” said Terry Baumer, executive associate dean of SPEA, in a statement.

This issue was one of the concerns addressed by participants in the Summit on Racial Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System that the Indiana State Bar Association helped organize in August 2009. In September 2010, the ISBA published a report based on the findings of the summit’s participants. Indiana Lawyer reported on the findings in the Sept. 29 – Oct. 12, 2010, edition.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • bias evident already
    I wonder if it will be a foregone conclusion that non-whites are discriminated against. The way the question is phrased it sounds like they aren't even entertaining the possibility that white kids actually might get worse treatment than nonwhites. Kind of like hate crime enhancements; only applied against whites, never to protect them.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT