THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, August 26, 1995 TAG: 9508260373
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY JUNE ARNEY, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Long : 138 lines
Before year's end, two bipartisan commissions studying juvenile justice will propose sweeping changes expected to radically alter the philosophy of treating young offenders.
Although each group includes lawmakers, victims, court officials and others, their approaches are different. Their thinking seems to follow party lines.
One commission, initiated by the Republican governor, is headed by Attorney General James S. Gilmore III. The other, Virginia's Commission on Youth, is chaired by Del. Jerrauld C. Jones, D-Norfolk.
Both will seek public comment in hearings during the fall and early winter. Their final recommendations will go to the 1996 General Assembly.
The Governor's Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform has focused on making public safety a priority - striking at the very foundation of the present juvenile code, based on rehabilitation.
Gilmore on Wednesday reminded members of the Governor's Commission of their charge: ``The task that we set for ourselves was a daunting one - nothing less than the complete overhaul of Virginia's system of juvenile justice.''
Jones' Commission on Youth also stresses public safety but within the framework of more traditional approaches to rehabilitation.
The same week that Gilmore made his comments, Jones told a group of juvenile judges that this is the year of juvenile justice reform and won applause when he said he considers the Juvenile Court the best place to handle juvenile offenders.
``Accountability and the honest provisions of services and opportunities to unlearn law breaking and violent behavior should be the yardstick by which any reform effort is measured,'' Jones said. ``I do not see the Juvenile Court as the kiddie court incapable of achieving accountability.''
Privately, judges and others are troubled by the role politics could play in the campaign for juvenile justice reform. They worry that the welfare of juveniles and the public may become secondary to election-year politics.
Even as the commissions design plans to take the Juvenile Courts into the next century, a third body - the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission - is analyzing data from Juvenile Courts across the state. Their findings will not be available until November, after the commissions have done the bulk of their work.
And there has been little time to assess the impact of 1994 legislation.
Those laws reduced the age, from 15 to 14, at which juveniles can be tried as adults, and increased judges' control over the length of time some juveniles spend in custody.
As of April 1, five 14-year-olds had been transferred to adult court for trial. As of May 15, 110 juveniles had been sentenced to an average term of 30 months in juvenile correctional centers.
A nonpartisan group called the Action Alliance for Virginia's Children and Youth is monitoring the current flurry of juvenile justice activity. The group is funded by a grant from the Freddie Mac Foundation and is based in Richmond.
Linda Nablo, senior policy analyst, has attended most meetings of both commissions and has tried to make sense of it all. Nablo has worked as a probation and intake officer, a juvenile correctional center family counselor and manager of the research and planning unit of the Department of Youth and Family Services.
According to Nablo, what is happening in Virginia is being repeated throughout the country.
``People are examining juvenile justice systems and asking are they still adequate to meet the needs of today's world,'' she said. ``My greatest fear is that we will end up with laws that abandon what is valuable and effective and humane in the juvenile justice system rather than strengthening and improving it.''
In fiscal year 1994 alone, Nablo said more than 60,000 criminal complaints were brought against Virginia youths. So, whatever changes are made will affect many families.
Although the Governor's Commission is farther along than the Commission on Youth, the two share many concerns. They include the philosophy of the juvenile court, confidentiality, who goes to adult court and how they get there, what kind of institutions will house juveniles, community alternatives and the role of public schools.
Both have discussed excluding certain violent offenders from juvenile courts and moving their trials directly to adult court.
The Governor's Commission is suggesting direct transfer of youths aged 14O or older who have committed violent offenses, including rape, murder and malicious wounding, or who have been convicted of three prior felonies.
The group also recommends that prosecutors be given the discretion to seek transfer to adult court for a child of any age accused of a felony - thus eliminating the current minimum age of 14. The youth then can argue to keep his case in juvenile court.
Jones' commission, on the other hand, is considering the direct transfer of juveniles 16 years of age or older charged with violent crimes. They tentatively have agreed not to abolish the minimum age for transfer.
As an alternative to transferring larger numbers of juveniles to adult court, they are considering ways to impose longer sentences in juvenile court.
``I think the General Assembly may very well be faced with the decision about whether there is a minimum age below which we would not allow the transfer of a juvenile to the adult system,'' Nablo said.
The groups seem to agree that law enforcement agencies need better access to records and that victims should be allowed to attend court hearings. But there is a wide range of thought on how to increase access.
The Governor's Commission is advocating the establishment of juvenile prisons run by the Department of Corrections to house juveniles until they can be placed in the general adult population.
The Commission on Youth is looking at smaller institutions, spread around the state and considering legislation requiring that a judge always play a role in releasing the juvenile.
Both groups favor judges being able to sentence juveniles to secure local facilities but disagree on other alternatives. The Governor's Commission is looking at boot camps and half-way houses while the Commission on Youth is talking about improving the variety of local programs.
The Governor's Commission wants to expand alternative education programs, and increase the number of police officers in the schools. The Commission on Youth is focusing on preventing truancy.
Despite a need for reform, all the talk needs to be kept in perspective, Nablo says.
``Though we certainly have a problem, we don't need to overreact,'' Nablo said. ``We don't just need to be tough, we need to be smart and deliberate.''
Virginia is far from being the worst state in the nation for juvenile crime, Nablo said. A recent U.S. Justice Department report ranked Virginia 36th in the country for violent juvenile crime. And violent crime represented only 3.1 percent of all juvenile arrests in Virginia in 1993, according to the Commission on Youth.
Nablo is concerned that both commissions have spent little time discussing the roots of juvenile crime: child abuse, violence in the home, drugs and the availability of guns among others. Therefore the emerging recommendations focus more on punishment than prevention, she said.
``I fear that we will fool ourselves into thinking that we have fixed the juvenile justice system, but unless we really look at it and try to attack the cause of juvenile crime, we won't have gained anything,'' she said.
One of the most fundamental questions to be answered is when does a child who breaks the law get treated as an adult, Nablo said.
``It's a real dichotomy for people to struggle with,'' she said. ``They are children, and a few of them are real violent. How do you resolve those two truths?'' ILLUSTRATION: Attorney General James Gilmore III
Del. Jerrauld Jones, D-Norfolk
by CNB