Abstract
Chapter 16 begins by very briefly revisiting the misinformation that dominates the transfer literature (see Chapters 6-11), and by briefly reaffirming the dimensions of transfer identified in Chapter 3. The Chapter then explains the three tasks associated with developing transfer policy: 1) choosing an option, such as no transfer, no transfer, but serious modifications to JC, selective transfer, or total transfer (abolition of JC); 2) selecting a transfer method, such prosecutorial transfer (PT) and/or judicial transfer (JT) (assuming transfer is the option chosen); and, 3) discussing implications associated with the available policies. The Chapter concludes by attempting to accomplish reconciliations in three contexts: whether there is a lack of fit between transfer and CC/CJ System outcomes; whether transfer should be backwards-looking (based on current offense and/or delinquent/treatment record) or forward-looking (based on future behavior forecasts, such as future dangerousness or desistance from crime); and, whether reverse transfer from CC should be available.
Reference120 articles.
1. Re-imagining childhood and reconstructing the legal order: The case for abolishing the juvenile court.;J. E.Ainsworth;North Carolina Law Review,1991
2. The regressive movement: When juvenile offenders are treated as adults, nobody wins.;K. M.Angell;Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal,2004
3. Public Support for Correctional Treatment: The Continuing Appeal of the Rehabilitative Ideal
4. Reconsidering Child Saving
5. Using Graham v. Florida to challenge juvenile transfer laws.;N.Arya;Louisiana Law Review,2010