Juvenile Homicide Offenders Research Articles

Juvenile Homicide Offenders: Factors in Desistance after Incarceration.

While several prior studies have examined the prevalence and predictors of recidivism among juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs), much less scholarly attention has been devoted to exploring the post-release factors that influence JHOs to desist from criminal behavior. Given relatively recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, individuals who commit homicide offenses as juveniles are less likely to spend the rest of their lives in prison. Accordingly, it is important to understand the factors associated with desistance in the post-incarceration lives of JHOs. The present study was designed to assess the effects of post-release factors on JHOs' recidivism outcomes, using a sample of 19 male JHOs from a southeastern U.S. state who were convicted as adults and sentenced to serve time in prison in the 1980s. These men were interviewed approximately 35 years after their original homicide offense about their adjustment to life in prison and after release, as well as their reasons for engaging in criminal behavior during adolescence. Thematic qualitative analysis was used to identify the post-release factors that were prevalent in the lives of the JHOs who desisted from crime. These five factors included avoiding old neighborhood and friends, positive intimate relationship, stable employment, human agency, and generativity. The implications of the findings for the prevention of recidivism among JHOs, as well as avenues for future research, are discussed.

Forensic assessment of criminal maturity in juvenile homicide offenders in the United States

The United States Supreme Court in Jones vs. Mississippi (2021) reinforced the Miller decision to allow sentencing judges the discretion to determine whether individuals convicted of murder under age 18 warrant a life sentence. The Miller decision dictates individualized sentencing, citing psychosocial disadvantages, immaturity, potential evolving risk, and how these qualities differ for each defendant. Since the Miller decision, mental health professionals routinely submit forensic reports as part of prisoners’ petitions to courts for reconsideration of their life sentences, either at the request of defense attorneys or prosecutors. This tracks a well-established practice of pre-sentencing evaluations. The expressions of immaturity in crime are not; however, accounted for in the same way that expressions of major mental illness reference years of crime-specific research and diagnostic standardization. For this reason, forensic assessments in this emerging area remain unguided and vulnerable to bias. Here, we present a guide containing 38 questions in seven developmental domains for individualized assessment and 50 questions spanning five domains that relate to the details of the crime. Our qualitative guidelines for assessment of the relevant domains of criminal maturity and offender prognosis draw on the forensic psychiatry, forensic pathology, developmental psychopathology, and criminological literatures, our experiences in comparative research of murder, sex assault and other crimes, as well as decades of experience in forensic assessment. A complete assessment of the offender should include questions in the developmental, scholastic/vocational, social, interpersonal, traumas, antisocial history, and psychiatric/medical domains. We also present recommended questions for assessing the details of the crime to more fully and accurately inform the individualized sentencing requirement in Miller cases.

Risk Assessment and Post-Release Recidivism in a Sample of Juvenile Homicide Offenders.

Given recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings regarding the constitutionality of juveniles who received mandated life sentences, questions have arisen in the field of criminology regarding how these offenders will adjust if someday released. Risk scores were calculated for 59 male juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) based upon the eight domains in the Youth Level of Supervision/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) and used to examine recidivism among the 48 JHOs who were released. Sample subjects were charged as adults for murder and attempted murder in the 1980s, convicted, and sentenced to adult prison. Chi-square analyses were used to assess the relationship between risk score category and two measures of recidivism, which were general arrests and violent offenses. Results indicated risk scores failed to predict both general and violent recidivism. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Juvenile Homicide in the United States: Sizing Up the Problem and Moving Forward

Juvenile murder arrests in the United States increased dramatically from 1984 to 1993, leading experts to forecast an epidemic of continued violence. Juvenile arrests for murder from 1995 to 2019 are examined to assess whether this prediction was correct. Changes in the laws in response to juvenile violence and US Supreme Court cases that addressed constitutional limitations to the punishment of juvenile murderers are synthesized. The evolution of research on juvenile homicide offenders over the last two decades is highlighted. Recommendations about ways to move forward by using evidence-based practices to prevent juvenile violence and to reduce recidivism are discussed.

Incorrigibility and the Juvenile Homicide Offender: An Ecologically Valid Integrative Review

The United States Supreme Court decision in Miller v. Alabama highlighted the importance of an individual’s “incorrigibility” and the prospect of “irreparable corruption” when weighing possible life sentencing for juveniles convicted of homicide. In this review, we study research in multiple content areas spanning homicide recidivism, life-course-persistent or career criminality, and psychopathology and incorrigibility that bears relevance to the risk assessment of juvenile homicide offenders. A well-developed corpus of research and scholarship in these domains documents the severe, lifelong behavioral impairments of the most violent delinquents. In contrast to studies of non-offender student samples and behaviors that bear no ecological validity to juvenile homicide, the research covered herein emanates from epidemiological surveys, birth cohort studies, large-scale prospective longitudinal studies, and correctional studies including homicide offenders and appropriate control groups of other serious delinquents. A rich research foundation in the social, behavioral, and forensic science informs relevant, reliable, and valid forensic assessments of future criminal deviance and incorrigibility in juvenile homicide offenders.

Juvenile homicide offenders: Why they were involved in serious crime.

The perpetration of murders by juveniles (individuals under age 18) has been a serious concern in the United States since the 1960s. As a result of four decisions by the United States Supreme Court during the 21st century, the likelihood that juvenile homicide offenders will be released back into society is substantially higher than it was in the year 2000. Given these changes in sentencing policies and practices, understanding why youths under 18 engage in homicidal behavior is more important than ever for two reasons: to prevent juveniles from killing in the first place and to determine whether their reasons for killing are related to post-release outcome. This research is a part of a 35-year follow-up study of 59 boys, age 14 to 17, who were convicted of murder or attempted murder, and sentenced to adult prisons in a southeastern state. Twenty of these men discussed the reasons for their involvement in murder in person in a second interview conducted by the author 35years after her first interview with them. These men's reasons for engaging in serious homicidal behavior reflected both psychological and sociological factors. Although the type of explanation for criminal involvement was not significantly related to post-release outcome, some interesting patterns were discernible. The implications of these findings, limitations of the study, and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Juveniles arrested for murder: A latent class analysis of male offenders.

Researchers and practitioners have a need for valid and generalizable typologies of juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) to better understand the heterogeneous nature of JHOs, and use this knowledge to inform prevention efforts. Prior studies of JHOs have typically utilized a clinical approach, which is rich in data but based on small nonrepresentative samples, or relied on larger aggregate datasets which are more reliable but have few measures available. This study aimed to address these limitations by examining the latent heterogeneity (i.e. unapparent differences) in JHOs, their victims, and incident characteristics among more than 40,000 male JHOs arrested in the United States between 1976 and 2016 using latent class analysis, to allow for the objective identification of latent taxonomies. Six distinct subtypes of male JHOs are found in the analysis, which contributes to the theoretical and substantive knowledge base regarding JHOs, and may be used to develop and implement more effective interventions and violence prevention programs for these young offenders.

The Meaning of Murder: Family Members in the Lives of Juvenile Homicide Offenders

Abstract This article underscores the litany of problems that arise for significant others when a juvenile is convicted of murder. It focuses on how these individuals confront the precise nature of their child’s criminality while simultaneously defending themselves against a series of attacks from a variety of intra- and extra-familial sources. A major conclusion of the article is that murderers’ relatives disappear into an eternal vortex of guilt, shame and anger with little, if any, formal or informal support as a means to manage or recover from the debilitating stigma and strain.

Juvenile Homicide Offenders Look Back 35 Years Later: Reasons They Were Involved in Murder.

Murders committed by juveniles have been a serious concern in the United States for more than 50 years. Decisions by the United States Supreme Court during the 21st century have reduced the likelihood that juvenile homicide offenders will be sentenced to life without parole (LWOP). As a result of these decisions, hundreds of prisoners who were sentenced as juveniles for murder to LWOP under mandatory sentencing statutes or its equivalent are now eligible for the reconsideration of their sentences. In light of these changes in sentencing policies and practices, follow-up research on juveniles convicted of murder is essential. This research is part of a 35-year follow-up study of 59 boys who were convicted of murder and sentenced to adult prisons in a southeastern state, and initially interviewed in the early 1980s. Twenty of these men agreed to participate in clinical interviews during which they reflected upon the reasons (i.e., motives, circumstances) for which they got involved in criminal behavior as juveniles. These reasons, which broadly tap tenets of psychological and sociological theories, were analyzed in terms of predominance. Thereafter, the attention focuses on looking at the relationship of these 20 reasons to recidivism among the 18 juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) who have been released from prison. JHOs who lived in neighborhoods where crime was routine and who engaged in crime because the opportunity presented itself were approximately 20 and 22.50 times more likely to be arrested post release and returned to prison, respectfully. The implications of these findings, the limitations of the study, and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Juvenile homicide offenders: A 35‐year‐follow‐up study

Murders committed by juveniles have been a major concern in the USA for more than 40 years. Due to decisions in the 21st century by the United States Supreme Court, the likelihood of juvenile homicide offenders being sentenced to life without parole (LWOP) is less than in past decades. In addition, hundreds of individuals in prison who were sentenced to LWOP under mandatory sentencing statutes or their equivalent as juveniles for murder are now eligible for resentencing and may be released. Given these changes in sentencing policies and practices, follow-up research on juveniles involved in murder is needed. This study is a 35-year follow-up study of 59 boys who were convicted of murder and sentenced to adult prisons in a southeastern state, and initially interviewed in the early 1980s. Twenty-two of these men agreed to participate in clinical interviews about their experiences in prison and upon return to the community if released. The experiences in prison are highlighted for all men. Thereafter, attention focuses on the 19 juvenile homicide offenders who have been released. Of these 19 men, 11 were classified as failures given that they were sent back to prison at least once. Length of time served and completion of GED were the best predictors of post-release success. Clinical observations, implications of the findings, limitations of the study, and directions for future research are discussed.

Distinguishing “incorrigibility” from “transient immaturity”: Risk assessment in the context of sentencing/resentencing evaluations for juvenile homicide offenders.

n two recent cases, the United States Supreme Court abolished mandatory juvenile life without parole (LWOP; Miller v. Alabama, 2012) and held that the ban applies retroactively (Montgomery v. Louisiana, 2016). Pointedly, the Court suggested that juveniles should only be sentenced to LWOP when they are 'incorrigible' or 'irreparably corrupt.' In practical terms, this means juveniles should only be sentenced to LWOP if they are unlikely to desist from criminal activity. Although there are no measures of long-term risk for juveniles, making it difficult to predict which juveniles are incorrigible or irreparably corrupt, forensic mental health professionals are increasingly being called upon to offer opinions about the long-term risk of juvenile offenders in homicide cases. This article provides a framework through which forensic mental health professionals can approach such cases. Given research indicating that most juvenile offenders will naturally desist from criminal activity over time, we suggest the default assumption of forensic mental health professionals should be that any individual juvenile offender is also likely to desist. Any adjustment from this base-rate-informed assumption requires empirical justification—namely, the existence of factors associated with life-course persistent offending. Further, treatment amenability, protective factors, and the availability of effective interventions for reducing criminal risk should be considered.

Youth Who Kill in Turkey: A Study on Juvenile Homicide Offenders, Their Offenses, and Their Differences From Violent and Nonviolent Juvenile Delinquents.

This study aims to answer two major research questions: (a) What are the characteristics of the juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) and their offenses in Turkey? (b) How do different risk factors vary across the JHOs and other violent and nonviolent juvenile offenders? The data set was derived from the court records of a group of adjudicated youth (n = 546) in Turkey. These records were coded to include information on both the offense characteristics of the homicides committed by juveniles (i.e., motivation, weapon of choice, victims' characteristics, etc.) and the individual and family-level risk factors available in JHOs and two other delinquent groups. Our findings indicated that most of the homicide cases committed by juveniles were motivated by a fight/argument and did not involve any criminal premeditation. The victims were mostly strangers and close in age to the offenders. JHOs were significantly different from other juvenile offenders in a number of aspects, such as age, number of siblings, effectiveness of intrafamilial communication, social mobility, having risky friends, being school dropouts, and working at a paid job. However, JHOs and other juvenile offenders were not significantly different in a majority of the assessed risk factors. The findings pointed out that the risks existing at JHOs were not reflecting the stereotypical perspectives about violent delinquents. For instance, JHOs had the lowest rate of having risky friends compared with other two groups of juvenile offenders. In addition, we found that a typical homicide committed by a juvenile in Turkey was not criminally motivated, in most instances, but the outcome of an instantly escalating personal conflict between youth. In light of the study findings, we proposed several policy implications such as keeping youth in a formal education system to prevent their exposure to culturally inherent adverse social values that promote violent and revengeful reactions to a personal conflict.

Evolving Standards of Decency: Juvenile Risk Assessment, Treatment Amenability, and the Courts

The objectives of this session are as follows: 1) to gain knowledge about the juvenile justice system and violent juvenile offenders; 2) to review the neurodevelopmental literature and the influence on recent landmark case law and legislative trends in juvenile sentencing and transfer to criminal court; 3) to understand the role of risk assessment and evaluating treatment amenability in juvenile offenders; 4) to learn an overview on risk assessment instruments specific to juvenile offenders; and 5) to work through unique cases involving juvenile homicide offenders to increase proficiency in using evidence-based risk assessment instruments.

Racial Differences Among Juvenile Homicide Offenders: An Empirical Analysis of 37 Years of U.S. Arrest Data.

Homicides by juvenile offenders have been of great interest to the public and policymakers in the United States for four decades. Despite the concern over young murderers, many analyses have been limited to small clinical samples. Empirical studies using Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR) data, a national database maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, have largely concentrated on analyzing basic victim, offender, and offense data or exploring gender differences. Racial differences, when explored with respect to juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs), largely have concentrated on White and Black offenders, given the low percentage involvement of American Indians and Alaskan Natives, and Asian and Pacific Islanders. This article used 37 years of SHR data (1976-2012; n = 52,916) to investigate differences between the four racial groups (White, Black, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and Asian American/Pacific Islander). This article focused on three questions: First, did the offender and offense characteristics of all JHOs arrested during the study period vary by race? Second, did the characteristics of victims, weapons used, crime circumstances, and offender count in incidents in which JHOs killed single victims differ across racial groups? Third, are offender, victim, and offense characteristics predictive of racial classification? Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. The findings revealed more similarities than differences across the racial groups. Multinomial regression analyses revealed, however, that several variables were found to distinguish racial groups of JHOs in a predictive way: region, location, White victim, family victim, gun use, and homicide circumstance. Importantly, American Indian/Alaskan Native and Asian/Pacific Islander JHOs significantly differed from White and Black JHOs. In contrast to media depiction, gang-related homicides were significantly more likely to involve Asian/Pacific Islander juveniles than juveniles from the other racial groups. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.

Juvenile homicide offender recidivism

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine and explain the recidivism outcomes of a large cohort of juvenile homicide offenders three years following their release from institutional confinement.Design/methodology/approachRetrospective data were utilized to examine demographic, background, and institutional behavior variables on post-release recidivism of 247 juvenile homicide offenders. Analyses distinguish between capital and non-capital juvenile homicide offenders.FindingsDescriptive analyses demonstrated a 50 percent recidivism rate among the sample of juvenile homicide offenders. Bivariate analyses revealed few significant differences between capital and non-capital homicide offending juveniles. Logistic regression analyses revealed that youth who were neglected prior to state institutionalization were significantly more likely to recidivate. Logistic regression also revealed that longer lengths of incarceration were associated with decreased odds of recidivism, while participating in assaultive behaviors against peers while confined aggravated the odds of recidivism.Research limitations/implicationsImplications related to the role that previous neglect, incarceration time, and institutional behavior can inform policymakers and practitioners on issues related to the treatment of juvenile homicide offenders while confined, and the impact that incarceration time and institutional behavior mean for post-release recidivism risk.Originality/valueLittle research has assessed the recidivism outcomes of juvenile homicide offenders, especially with a larger sample size. None have examined the differences between capital and non-capital homicide offending juveniles. As juvenile jurisdictions continue to retain more homicide offending juveniles (as opposed to their removal to adult systems), there is value to the research to inform policy and practice with such an enriched and problematic groups of offenders.

Post-incarceration Recidivism of Lone versus Group Juvenile Homicide Offenders.

Killings by juvenile homicide offenders (JHOs) who use accomplices have been increasing since the 1980s and currently represent approximately half of juvenile arrests for murder in the United States. Nevertheless, prior research has not compared JHOs who kill alone with JHOs who kill in groups. The present research followed up 30years later on a sample of 59 male murderers and attempted murderers sentenced to adult prison. This study was designed to analyze whether lone and group JHOs differed on pre-incarceration, incarceration, and post-incarceration variables. Significant findings indicated that compared with lone offenders, group JHOs had a higher mean of pre-homicide arrests and were more likely to be Black, have a pre-homicide delinquent record, commit a crime-related homicide offense, and target a stranger. With respect to post-homicide variables, group JHOs were more likely to be released from prison and more likely to be rearrested. The two types of JHOs did not differ significantly in relation to the number of post-release violent offenses. Preliminary implications of the findings and avenues for future investigation are discussed. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Examination of long-term postrelease outcomes of juvenile homicide offenders

ABSTRACTHomicide by juveniles, a matter of serious concern in the United States since the 1980s, remains a pressing issue due to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. The present study explored long-term recidivism in a sample of 59 male juvenile homicide offenders sentenced to adult prison for murder or attempted murder in the early 1980s. The results indicated that nearly 90% of released offenders were rearrested during the 30-year follow-up period. More than 60% were rearrested for violent offenses. Race and time served were found to be significantly related to postrelease violence. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

The hazards of premature release: Recidivism outcomes of blended-sentenced juvenile homicide offenders

PurposeThis study explored the deep-end juvenile sentencing structure of blended sentencing by examining correlates – pre-incarceration social and delinquent backgrounds and institutional behavior outcomes – of serious recidivism among a large sample of juvenile homicide offenders. MethodsThis study reports on the ten-year survival analysis of 221 juvenile homicide offenders committed to juvenile incarceration under Texas' blended sentencing structure. Serious recidivism was operationalized as a felony arrest and the Royston–Parmar model clustered the resulting coefficients by subjects' race classifications. ResultsThe majority of juvenile homicide offenders were rearrested for a felony offense within 10years post-incarceration. Net a number of control variables, three institutional metrics significantly increased the risk of felony recidivism among the cohort of juvenile homicide offenders. A history of assaultive behavior toward correctional staff and elevated observed program disruption scores correlated with greater recidivism risk, while longer time incarcerated was correlated with lower risks of recidivism. ConclusionsFindings reported here suggest a degree of continuity between institutional behavior and recidivism outcomes among these young adult offenders. The insulating effects of longer incarceration periods against serious recidivism and diminished recidivism risk during the final years of the study provide the basis for theoretical and policy implications.

Age effects on juvenile homicide perpetration

Purpose – In order to address a notable gap in the research literature, the purpose of this paper is to examine age-related differences in juvenile homicide perpetration. Design/methodology/approach – Data on 150 juvenile homicide offenders and their offences was derived from material available within the public domain, including media reports, case studies, court reports and previously published studies. Comparisons were then made between those aged 14 and under (n=63) and those aged 14-17 (n=87) across a range of offender, victim and offence-related variables. Findings – There were no significant differences between the child (U-14) and adolescent (14-17) offender samples on any of the measured variables. The two groups had similar backgrounds, selected similar types of victims, had comparable breakdowns of different types of victim-offender relationship and had similar patterns of weapon use. Research limitations/implications – The fact that the two groups did not differ significantly has notable implications in practical and applied domains. By identifying risk factors for juvenile homicide perpetration, findings open up a range of possibilities for identification, investigation and intervention. In addition, findings might inform the development of offender treatment and rehabilitation programmes. Key limitations relate to the quality and quantity of data employed. Ways of remedying these weaknesses in future research are addressed. Originality/value – This is the first study to directly compare child and adolescent perpetrators of homicide over a broad range of offender, victim and offence attributes.

Juvenile Sentencing in Illinois: Addressing The Supreme Court Trend Away from Harsh Punishments for Juvenile Offenders

The United States Supreme Court has steadily been changing the way it approaches juvenile sentencing since 2005. This ideological shift has occurred as a response to the increase in biological and sociological studies, which point toward fundamental differences between juveniles and adults. This Note addresses how the new mandates by the Supreme Court have been implemented around the country, with a focus on statutory changes Illinois should make moving forward. Specifically, this Note argues that there are several adjustments Illinois will have to make in regards to the way it sentences juvenile homicide offenders, in order to be considered Constitutional based on the analysis set forth by the Supreme Court in Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, and Miller v. Alabama. First, lengthy, consecutive term-of-years sentences should be abolished because it does not give juvenile offenders the “meaningful opportunity for release” required by Graham. This Note suggests that courts need to look at the idea of a “meaningful opportunity for release” differently when sentencing juveniles as opposed to adult offenders, because studies have shown that adolescents who are imprisoned have a much lower life expectancy than average. Second, Illinois should amend its sentencing statutes to require judges to consider several factors, while on record at a sentencing hearing, before sentencing a juvenile homicide offender to life in prison. These factors, laid out within this Note, will put Illinois at the forefront of ethical juvenile sentencing, while also ensuring that it does not violate the authority of Miller. Admittedly, these theories have been criticized for being too ‘soft’ on punishment for juveniles who are convicted of felony murder. However, the suggestions in this Note are meant to allow for the protection of the adolescent’s Eighth Amendment right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment, while also considering the severity and nature of the offense.