Teen arrests drop steeply in Massachusetts after criminal justice reform

Springfield juvenile court

4/25/2016 -Springfield- Parking in downtown Springfield: Shown here are Housing and Juvenile court on the left and the Hampden County Hall of Justice on the right. (Don Treeger / The Republican)Staff-Shot

Since Massachusetts’ criminal justice reform law went into effect, far fewer children and teenagers are coming into contact with the juvenile justice system.

Juvenile arrests dropped by 43% between fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2019, from nearly 2,500 to 1,400, according to a new report. Complaints and delinquency filings dropped by 26% and 33% respectively. A complaint is filed when a juvenile age 12-17 is accused of criminal activity; a delinquency filing occurs after a clerk magistrate finds probable cause that the juvenile committed a crime.

With fewer youths being charged, fewer teens are also being taken into state custody. Admissions for pretrial detention for juveniles dropped by 27%, from more than 1,200 to around 900, and first-time commitments to the Department of Youth Services, which supervises juvenile delinquents, dropped by 17%, from 233 to 194.

“It is clear the law is having its intended effect,” the report said.

The report was released Dec. 26 by the Juvenile Justice Policy and Data Board, led by Child Advocate Maria Mossaides and created by the 2018 criminal justice reform law to study juvenile justice issues.

The 2018 criminal justice reform focused on diverting more people out of the justice system and rehabilitating those who are in it.

Relating to juvenile justice, the law raised the age at which someone can be held responsible from 7 to 12. Only a small number of children were previously being held responsible before age 12, but the law basically reduced this to zero. It gave judges more discretion to divert teenagers out of the system before arraignment and use restorative justice programs.

Perhaps the biggest impact, based on the new report, is that the law removed court jurisdiction over first-time low-level offenses, such as disorderly conduct, violating local ordinances, causing disturbances at school or various low-level misdemeanors. This means if a teenager is caught for the first time for something like shoplifting, vandalism, possessing alcohol or disturbing a school assembly, they will not be criminally charged.

The data documented huge decreases in the number of juvenile complaints filed for offenses related to school disturbances, alcohol, motor vehicle and property cases.

Melissa Threadgill, director of juvenile justice initiatives at the Office of the Child Advocate, said research has shown that adolescents are more likely to take risks and test limits, and their brains are still developing.

“The vast majority of kids who commit crimes grow out of that behavior without the need for intervention,” Threadgill said. She said the research also shows that interacting with the criminal justice system on average can be harmful for kids and can increase the likelihood of future criminal behavior.

“If we reduce the number of kids who are interacting with the juvenile justice system, particularly for first-time offenses, we’ll see better life outcomes for kids and ultimately impact public safety,” Threadgill said.

The report does note that juvenile arrests have been declining for some time, so the drop cannot be entirely attributed to the new law.

The board did not find that troubled teens are increasingly turning to other state services. But it noted that data is limited regarding what happens to teens with behavioral problems who do not end up in the court system, because services provided by schools, health care providers or community groups will not show up in state data.

Tammy Mello, executive director of Children’s League of Massachusetts and a member of the Juvenile Justice Policy and Data Board, said many children who get involved with the juvenile justice system have trauma in their background. Some struggle with mental health issues or opioid addiction.

Mello said it is “fantastic” that these kids are not entering the juvenile justice system, which can be a pathway to jail and have long-term consequences. But she said there needs to be a way of ensuring these kids are served if they end up at family resource centers, which offer community-based support, or in the child welfare system.

“The real challenge is making sure we pay attention to the fact those kids aren’t just disappearing, and we’re making sure they have the resources they need if they’re showing up in other places,” Mello said.

One concern identified by the report is that youth of color continue to be disproportionately represented at every level of the juvenile justice system. Black and Latino teens combined make up 26% of the state population of 12- to 17-year-olds. But these groups account for 47% of applications for complaints, 56% of delinquency filings and 73% of custodial arrests within this age group.

The disparities between white teenagers and those of color increased with the law’s passage, indicating the criminal justice reform is more likely to benefit white youth. For example, the arrest rate of white youth dropped by 56% after criminal justice reform, but the arrest rate for black youth dropped by 32% and for Hispanic/Latino youth by 39%.

The study was unable to determine if the racial disparities were because black and Latino youth committed more serious offenses, although prior studies have found racial disparities even when the same offenses are charged.

“It is clear ... that more work is necessary at all levels to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in our juvenile justice system,” the report said.

Threadgill said those statistics are “troubling” and “point to the need for further work.”

A separate report released by the board examines the community-based diversion programs available to juveniles. The report finds that there is no statewide standard for diversion programs and no oversight.

The report also finds that white youth are more likely to be put into diversion programs, while black and Latino youth are more likely to end up in the court system. This cannot be entirely attributed to criminal history or type of charge.

“The absence of standardized, consistent and clear guidelines and inconsistent adoption of evidence-based diversion models likely contributes to the systemic demographic and geographic inequalities we find present in our system,” the report said.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.