Abstract
The legal judgments of 20 juvenile offenders and 20 non-offenders were examined for three types of crimes: assault, arson and treason. Mitigating circumstances cast in the form of an inability to control events consisted of brain damage, passion and economic need, in contrast to a situation in which no mitigating circumstances were offered. The results indicated that despite the often-made legal argument, neither group regarded passion and economic need as circumstances warranting the reduction of sentencing. Compared to the non-offender group, offenders rated brain damage as less mitigating. While non-offenders rated passion and economic need more severely than brain damage, offenders' ratings of the three circumstances did not differ significantly. The findings are discussed in terms of perceptions of control and structural-developmental approaches to socialization.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
