For a fair and effective

youth justice system

PUBLIC OPINION ON YOUTH,

CRIME AND RACE:
A Guide for Advocates

By Mark Soler
President, Youth Law Center

October 2001

PUBLIC OPINION ON YOUTH, CRIME, AND RACE:

A GUIDE FOR ADVOCATES
The Building Blocks for Youth initiative has five major components:

Research on the disparate impact of the justice system on youth of color, on the
effects of adult-court transfer legislation in the states, and on the privatization of
juvenile justice facilities by for-profit corporations;

Analyses of decisionmaking at critical points in the justice system, including

arrest, detention, adjudication, and disposition;

Direct advocacy on behalf of youth in the justice system, particularly on issues

that disproportionately affect youth of color such as conditions of confinement in
jails, prisons, and juvenile facilities; access to counsel and adequacy of
representation in juvenile court; and zero tolerance and other issues relating to
school suspensions and expulsions;

Constituency-building among African-American, Latino, and Native-American and

other minority organizations, as well as organizations in the medical, mental
health, legal, law enforcement, child welfare, civil rights, human rights, religious,
victims rights, and domestic violence areas, at the national, state, and local levels;

Development of communications strategies to provide timely, accurate, and

relevant information to these constituencies, public officials, policymakers, the
media, and the public.

The partners in the initiative are the Youth Law Center, American Bar Association
Juvenile Justice Center, Justice Policy Institute, Juvenile Law Center, Minorities in
Law Enforcement, National Council on Crime and Delinquency and Pretrial Services
Resource Center.
The initiative is supported by the Annie E. Casey, Ford, Mott, MacArthur, Rockefeller
and William T. Grant foundations, the Center on Crime, Communities & Culture of
the Open Society Institute, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention and Bureau of Justice Assistance of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not
necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice
or the supporting foundations.
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge John Russonello and Kate Steward of
Belden, Russonello and Stewart for their patience and thoughtfulness, and Liz Ryan
and Laura Jones for their work on the Close Cheltenham and Close Tallulah sections
of the report.

www.buildingblocksforyouth.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction .............................................................................................................. 4
Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 7
Public Opinion Research Findings ........................................................................... 12
Youth and Juvenile Crime .............................................................................. 12
Youth and the Justice System......................................................................... 13
Race and Fairness ......................................................................................... 15
Messages and Messengers ............................................................................. 16
Conclusions................................................................................................... 18

Recommendations .................................................................................................. 19
Key Messages ................................................................................................ 19
Key Messengers ............................................................................................ 24
Messaging..................................................................................................... 26

Case Examples ...................................................................................................... 27

The Maryland Campaign to Close Cheltenham ............................................. 27
The Louisiana Campaign to Close Tallulah................................................... 31
Sample Materials .................................................................................................. 34
Press Statements, opinion-editorials, and news articles ............................... 34
Key Dates in Juvenile Justice ...................................................................... 42

INTRODUCTION
In recent years, a host of juvenile justice
issues have been in the forefront of public
debate and policy discussion: racial
disparities in the justice system,
prosecution of youth in adult criminal
court, incarceration of young people in
jails and prisons, and effectiveness of
prevention and treatment programs. From
1992 to 1997, 47 states and the District of
Columbia made their juvenile justice
systems more punitive, either by making it
easier to prosecute juveniles as adults, by
expanding sentencing authority, or by
removing confidentiality protections of
juvenile court records or proceedings.1 Yet
research has demonstrated that youth
prosecuted in adult court actually have
higher recidivism rates and commit more
serious crimes later than youth in juvenile
court.2 A report by the Surgeon General in
January, 2001 dispelled a number of
myths about youth and violence,
including the myths that minority youth
are more likely to become involved in
violence than other racial or ethnic groups
and that getting tough with young
offenders by prosecuting them as adults
will lead to less crime. The report also
confirmed earlier research on the
effectiveness of a variety of violence
prevention programs.3
Building Blocks for Youth, a national
initiative for a fair and effective youth
justice system, issued several reports
during 2000 and 2001 on these issues.
The Color of Justice, by the Justice Policy
Institute, found that in California minority
youth prosecuted in adult court were
much more likely to be sentenced to
imprisonment than white youth, even
when arrested for similar offenses.4 And

Justice for Some, a comprehensive

national report by the National Council on
Crime and Delinquency, found that youth
of color are treated more severely than
white youth at every stage of the justice
system from arrest to incarceration
even when charged with the same
offenses.5 Youth Crime/Adult Time, an indepth study by Pretrial Services Resource
Center of youth prosecuted as adults in 18
of the largest jurisdictions in the country,
found racial disparities similar to those in
earlier reports, and raised serious
questions about the fairness and
appropriateness of the process. It found
that most determinations to prosecute
youth in adult court (85%) were made by
prosecutors or legislatures, not by judges;
a significant number of youth were
charged with non-violent offenses; a
majority of youth in the study were
released before trial, most within 24 hours
of having charges filed, and many were
released without bail, all indicating that
the charges were not especially serious.6
In Drugs and Disparity: The Racial Impact
of Illinois Practice of Transferring Young
Drug Offenders to Adult Court, the study
analyzed data from state criminal justice
agencies in Illinois and national
corrections databases. It reported that
Illinois practice of automatically sending
15 and a 16- year-old youth charged with
drug crimes within 1,000 feet of a school
or public housing project to adult court
has produced one of the most racially
disparate outcomes in the nation. Of the
259 youth automatically transferred to
adult court from Cook County over a year
period, only one was White. Over 99% of
the Cook County youth automatically
transferred to the adult court for drug
crimes were minority youth.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Juvenile justice battles are increasingly

fought in the court of public opinion. The
myth that a new breed of young and
violent super-predators threatens the
nation (also debunked by the Surgeon
Generals report) may be the most obvious
example of a sound bite driving national
policy, but it is hardly the only one. The
penchant of television news for reporting
violent crime prominently and often (If it
bleeds, it leads.), despite seven straight
years of decreases in crime in all
categories, adds to the problem. In Off
Balance: Youth, Race and Crime in the
News, another Building Blocks report,
researchers from the Berkeley Media
Studies Group and the Justice Policy
Institute found that overall media coverage
of youth crime is increasing regardless of
actual changes in crime and that youth
and minorities are over-depicted as
criminals in the news media.
Consequently despite a 68% decline in
youth homicides from 1993 to 1999, 62%
of poll respondents in 1999 believed youth
crime was up. These data make it even
more important that child advocates learn
to access the media with messages that
will resonate with the public. Advocates
for children and youth need to equip
themselves to meet these issues.
Information on juvenile justice research,
and on effective prevention and treatment
programs, is available from a number of
sources, including the Building Blocks for
Youth website,
www.buildingblocksforyouth.org.
Information on public opinion has not
been as readily available, in part because
there have been few public opinion polls
taking an in-depth look at attitudes
toward youth, crime, race, and the justice
system.

To address the gap in public opinion

research, Building Blocks for Youth has
responded in several ways. First, it
surveyed the available public opinion
research on youth and justice issues,
such as polls conducted in past years by
the Gallup Organization, CBS News, NBC
News, CNN, Time, The New York Times,
The Los Angeles Times, and the California
Wellness Foundation. Second, it convened
a series of ten focus groups, two each in
Baltimore, Richmond, Chicago, Seattle,
and South San Francisco, on youth,
crime, and race issues. The groups were
separated by gender, race/ethnicity, and
education level to facilitate candid
discussions.7 Third, it conducted an
extensive national survey on attitudes
toward youth crime, the juvenile justice
system, the impact of race, and messages,
policies, and messengers for change.8 This
public opinion research was undertaken
by Belden Russonello & Stewart, a
research and communications firm located
in Washington, DC.
Other groups have also surveyed on these
issues. In anticipation of the 100th
anniversary of the first Juvenile Court in
Cook County, Illinois, the Childrens Court
Centennial Committee (CCCC)
commissioned Peter Hart Research and
Public Opinion Strategies to do a survey in
Illinois of adult and youth attitudes about
juvenile justice issues. The FrameWorks
Institute and the Center for
Communications and Community at UCLA
prepared a summary and analysis of
survey research related to the publics
attitudes concerning adolescents,
performed a content analysis of the
representation of adolescents in television
entertainment programming, and
conducted in-depth interviews and focus
groups during 1999 and 2000.9

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

This advocacy guide summarizes the

public opinion research on youth and
juvenile justice issues from the Building
Blocks focus groups and national poll, as
well as other polls. Unless otherwise
noted, detailed findings discussed below
are from the Building Blocks poll. After
summarizing the public opinion research,
this advocacy guide makes
recommendations about how advocates
can frame the issues in their work
(focusing on effective messages and
messengers), and how they can use this
information in their organizing and
advocacy efforts.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH FINDINGS
YOUTH AND JUVENILE CRIME

The public is less fearful about crime than in the past

However, the public believes that juvenile crime is increasing

The public overwhelmingly believes that youth violence is a big problem facing the
country

The concern about youth and crime is evident in the publics reaction to terms used to
describe people under the age of 18

A significant portion of the public associates juvenile crime with youth who are young
teenagers

At the same time, the public is skeptical about depictions of youth and crime in the
media

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the public does not associate juvenile crime primarily
with the poor, but instead sees crime as a problem at all socio-economic levels

The public associates a wide variety of crimes with young people

The public believes that youth who break the law will commit other crimes in the future,
even if youth have no prior record10

The public believes that many factors cause juvenile crime

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH FINDINGS

YOUTH AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

The public has serious concerns about the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system

Out of frustration over a broken juvenile justice system, the public supports prosecution
of juveniles in adult criminal court for a wide range of offenses

The public believes that the nature of the offense is much more important than a
youths prior record or age in determining punishment

The public has great concern about what happens to young people in the justice system

The public overwhelmingly (90%) supports a focus on prevention and rehabilitation

rather than imprisonment, and strongly endorses a variety of rehabilitation programs

RACE AND FAIRNESS

The public holds mixed and complex views about racial stereotypes and crime

The public is not certain whether the system acts in a biased manner

The public is clearly concerned about fairness in the justice system

Large majorities support measures to remedy unequal treatment of racial minorities

The public is more aware of economic unfairness in the system

The public considers racial inequalities and economic unfairness as equally important

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH FINDINGS

MESSAGES & MESSENGERS

The public is persuaded by pro-change messages that are practical and that recognize
the potential for change of youth in trouble

The highest percentage of respondents found certain practical messages most

convincing, e.g. A system that does little more than lock up juveniles will lead to more
crime, not less.

A substantial number of respondents also found convincing messages that speak to

youths potential for change such as Juvenile offenders often have emotional problems
and need counseling, not prison.

For many people, however, negative attitudes toward youth are deeply ingrained

Messages that appeared to be excuses for criminal conduct were not convincing, such as
Many teenagers who commit crimes were abused and neglected when they were young.

The public was less convinced by messages that cite statistics

Much of the public finds convincing those messages that focus on accountability and
consequences for young people

The public does not find the straightforward public safety argument, Locking up
juvenile offenders sends a message and will make communities safer very convincing

The public supports court-imposed consequences for young offenders that stress
responsibility and accountability

Near majorities believe that certain programs would be very effective for youth, such as
requiring and providing professional counseling to juvenile offenders or using scared
straight programs in which juveniles who commit crimes visit adult facilities

The public does not believe that incarceration is effective

The public also makes clear distinctions among those who carry messages about crime
and youth, giving highest credibility to rehabilitated juvenile offenders and victims of
crime, high credibility to policy and judges, and least credibility to public officials.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

CONCLUSIONS

The public is ready to support an agenda for juvenile justice reform, but the agenda
must be tied to the publics concerns about accountability and fairness.

The public believes that the juvenile justice system should impose consequences on
youth who break the law as a way of teaching them responsibility.

Imposing accountability and consequences, however, does not necessarily require

incarceration.

The public shows little support for simply locking up young people.

But the public does not support the youth excuse either.

Instead, the public supports rehabilitation and treatment programs because they
recognize that youth have the potential for change and in the long run will make our
communities safer.

The public also cares about fairness. In the Building Blocks poll in early 1999, the
public, particularly Whites, reported little awareness of racial unfairness. Nevertheless,
if told of unfairness, all segments of the public considered a matter of serious concern.

RECOMMENDATIONS
KEY MESSAGES

Acknowledge accountability

Emphasize that accountability does not necessarily mean incarceration

Frame prevention and rehabilitation as practical responses to concerns about youth

crime

Promote rehabilitation that includes meeting with and compensating victims

Promote rehabilitation that includes mentoring and counseling

Inform about racial unfairness

Link racial unfairness to economic unfairness

Recognize that racial unfairness is different from ineffectiveness of the system

10

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Inform about the consequences of prosecution of youth as adults

Avoid the youth excuse

Dont rely on statistics alone

RECOMMENDATIONS
KEY MESSENGERS

Put a face on the problem through personal stories of incarcerated youth

Use appropriate messengers such as rehabilitated juvenile offenders and their parents
and victims of crime

Recruit unusual allies such as police, prosecutors and victims organizations

MESSAGING

Communicate clear and straightforward messages

Use these messages proactively and look for opportunities to communicate your juvenile
justice reform message to the public through the media

Train the 'messengers' to utilize the key messages in this guide

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

11

PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH

FINDINGS
YOUTH AND JUVENILE CRIME

The public is less fearful about crime

than in the past:

As crime rates have dropped across the

country over the past seven years, the
public is somewhat less fearful about
crime. Thus, the percentage of the public
that believes that overall crime is
increasing has actually decreased
significantly over the past seven years. A
CBS and New York Times poll in 1994
found that 73% of the public believed that
crime was increasing, but that dropped to
51% in 1996 and to 38% in the Building
Blocks poll in 1999. Correspondingly, only
3% of the public believed that crime was
decreasing in 1994, but that rose to 26%
in 1999.

However, the public believes that

juvenile crime is increasing:

A substantial majority of the public

believes that juvenile crime is increasing.
A 1995 CBS News and New York Times
poll found that 84% believed juvenile
crime was increasing, compared to only
2% that believed juvenile crime was
decreasing. By 1999, 62% still believed
that juvenile crime was increasing, and
only 8% believed that juvenile crime was
decreasing. The FrameWorks research
found that the public believes that youth
today are different from youth in the
past, i.e., that todays teens have rejected
traditional American values and are
selfish and materialistic.

12

The public overwhelmingly believes

that youth violence is a big problem
facing the country:

Women are more likely to see youth

violence as a big problem than men, and
people of color are more likely to see it as
a big problem than Whites, but the
concern cuts across all categories: gender,
race/ethnicity, education level, income
level, political party, area of the country,
and whether respondents live in cities,
suburbs, or rural areas.

The concern about youth and crime

is evident in the publics reaction to
terms used to describe people under
the age of 18:

In the Building Blocks poll, the terms

youth and young people elicited
strongly positive reactions and little in the
way of negatives. Teenagers also brought
much more positive reaction than negative
(although the FrameWorks poll found
strongly negative associations to the
word). In the Building Blocks poll, public
reaction to kids was about equally
positive or neutral, with somewhat less
negative reaction. But the term juvenile
was strongly negative: three times as
many people saw it as negative as saw it
positive. From the focus groups it was
evident that the term juvenile is
associated with juvenile delinquent, and
therefore carries a very negative image.
A significant portion of the public
associates juvenile crime with youth
who are young teenagers:
Two fifths of respondents thought of
juvenile crime in connection with 13-15
year olds, and almost half associated
crime with 16 and 17 year olds.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

At the same time, the public is

skeptical about depictions of youth
and crime in the media:

The public suspects that media coverage

of violent juvenile crime paints a distorted
picture. This was clear in both the
Building Blocks and FrameWorks focus
groups.

Contrary to conventional wisdom,

the public does not associate
juvenile crime primarily with the
poor, but instead sees crime as a
problem at all socio-economic levels:

Roughly equal numbers of the public

believe that juvenile crime is committed by
poor youth and by middle-class youth.
Indeed, in the Building Blocks poll, onethird of the respondents volunteered the
answer that juvenile crime is committed
by youth of all economic classes. The
CCCC poll found similar opinions.

The public associates a wide variety

of crimes with young people:

Drug offenses were the most common

response, with about one quarter, followed
in order by theft and stealing, vandalism,
robbery, shoplifting and petty theft,
murder, burglary, car theft and joy-riding,
shootings and stabbings, and assault and
battery. Overall, more respondents
identified youth with non-violent crimes
(drugs and property offenses such as theft
and burglary) than violent crimes
(shootings, stabbings, robbery).
Respondents cited the least serious crimes
(drugs, vandalism, shoplifting) more than
twice as often as the most serious offenses
such as murder.

The public believes that youth who

break the law will commit other
crimes in the future, even if youth
have no prior record:

Almost 20% believe a youth is almost

certain to re-offend, another 50% believe
a youth will probably re-offend.
Significantly, it did not matter whether a
youth was Black or White: the percentages
for each response was virtually identical.

The public believes that many

factors cause juvenile crime:

The public believes that the most

important cause of juvenile crime is lack
of strong families. In addition, the public
listed, in descending order of importance:
drugs, no sense of right and wrong, gangs,
immaturity and bad judgment, availability
of guns, television and movie violence,
poverty, and poor schools. Earlier polls by
news organizations made similar findings.

YOUTH AND THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

The public has serious concerns
about the effectiveness of the juvenile
justice system:
4 in 10 rate the juvenile justice system as
poor or very poor and an equal
percentage rate it fair. Only 1% rated it
excellent. The public overwhelmingly
describes the system as overburdened, too
lenient, and unable to change young
people. A 1994 Gallup poll found similar
beliefs. The CCCC poll also found that the
juvenile court is not viewed as making a
major contribution to helping children in
trouble. The public is fearful of juvenile
crime and believes that the juvenile justice

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

13

system does not hold youth accountable

for their actions. The public believes that
the system lets delinquent youth back on
the streets too easily, without
rehabilitation to turn their lives around.

Out of frustration over a broken

juvenile justice system, the public
supports prosecution of juveniles in
adult criminal court for a wide range
of offenses:

(1) The juvenile justice system is housing

youth in dirty, dangerous, overcrowded
facilities.
(2) Too many juvenile offenders are
housed in facilities with adult inmates.
(3) Wealthy juveniles are less likely to be
locked up than are poor juveniles for
committing the same crime.11

Focus groups reveal that the public does

not understand what it means to
prosecute a young person as an adult
(e.g., that youth can be held in adult jails),
but the clear feeling is that adult
prosecution carries a more certain
imposition of consequences than juvenile
court. Earlier polls found similar attitudes.

The public believes that the nature

of the offense is much more
important than a youths prior
record or age in determining
punishment:

In the Building Blocks poll, almost twothirds said that the most important factor
in setting punishment is the type of crime
committed.

The public has great concern about

what happens to young people in the
justice system:

More than half of respondents in the

Building Blocks poll rated the following
concerns as extremely serious and
another 30% rated them as somewhat
serious:

14

The public overwhelmingly (90%)

supports a focus on prevention and
rehabilitation rather than
imprisonment, and strongly endorses
a variety of rehabilitation programs:

The Building Blocks poll found that among

rehabilitation methods, the public heavily
favors those that emphasize responsibility
and accountability: meeting with victims
and compensating victims. More than half
also favor mentoring programs and
community service, and nearly half
support counseling and scared straight
programs. Only 15% thought that locking
youth up in juvenile facilities is very
effective in rehabilitating them. Earlier
polls found majorities (though not as
large) supporting prevention over
incarceration. The CCCC poll found that a
majority is optimistic that offenders, even
violent ones, can be rehabilitated. That
poll also found that Americans believe that
any adult can make a difference in the life
of a young person by volunteering time as
a mentor, youth group leader, Big Brother
or Big Sister, or by becoming a foster or
adoptive parent. The FrameWorks
research also emphasized the importance
of mentoring and guidance for
adolescents.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

RACE AND FAIRNESS

The public holds mixed and complex

views about racial stereotypes and
crime:

In the Building Blocks focus groups, many,

participants talked about Black youth
committing crimes. There were
considerable differences among
participants, depending upon the
geographical location, gender, and income
level of participants. Some included White
youth in their picture of youth crime,
others talked primarily about Black youth.
Some participants looked at the matter in
terms of socio-economic issues, saying
that the problems driving youth toward
crime are perhaps worse in the Black
community but are the same problems for
Blacks and Whites, particularly lack of
strong families and feelings of
hopelessness. Other participants said that
Black youth hold different values than
White youth, and that committing crimes
is a rite of passage for many Black youth
today.
In the national Building Blocks poll, when
asked the question directly, just over a
third (34%) of respondents agreed with the
statement Black juveniles are more likely
to commit crime than white juveniles.
White and Latino respondents were
slightly more likely to agree with the
statement; about one-quarter of Black
respondents agreed with the statement.

For some people, these are two very

different questions: the first is a matter of
crime statistics and the second may reflect
deeply rooted biases. For others, the
questions may seem quite similar. As has
been noted in connection with public
opinion polls regarding voting for Black or
Latino vs. White politicians, there may be
significant differences between responses
to opinion polls and actual behavior.
Another Building Blocks poll question
indicated that having a prior offense may
override feelings about race. The question
presented a scenario of a teenager with no
criminal record who stole a car and was
caught by the police. For half the
respondents, the teenager was identified
as White, for the other half as Black.
When respondents were asked about the
likelihood that hte teenager would commit
another crime, the responses were nearly
identical: regardless of the teenagers race,
19% were almost certain he would
commit another crime, about half thought
he would probably commit another
crime, about 20% felt is was unlikely,
and 3% said it was very unlikely.

The public is not certain whether the

system acts in a biased manner:

In the Building Blocks poll, respondents

were equally split whether the juvenile
justice system treats Blacks and Latinos
fairly or unfairly. Breaking down the
responses by race, however, revealed
significant differences: 7 out of 10 Black
respondents believed that the system is
unfair to both groups, and more than half
of Latino respondents believed the system
is unfair to Latinos (though not to Blacks).
There may be movement on this issue,
since this poll was conducted before the

The results were similar with the

statement Black juveniles are more prone
to violence than juveniles of other races:
35% agreed overall, the same percentage
of White and Latino respondents agreed,
and 31% of Black respondents agreed.
Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

15

significant media attention to racial

profiling (particularly Driving While
Black) and the media coverage of reports
on racial disparities in the justice system
(including reports by Building Blocks for
Youth).

inequities track closely with attitudes

toward economic unfairness: the public
considers both to be comparable
injustices.

The public is clearly concerned

about fairness in the justice system:

If told that the justice system does treat

Black youth unfairly, the public clearly
considers the situation a serious matter:
almost half of respondents considered it
extremely serious, and another third
considered it somewhat serious.

MESSAGES AND MESSENGERS

As noted above, the public overwhelmingly

supports prevention and rehabilitation
rather than imprisonment.

Large majorities support measures to

remedy unequal treatment of racial
minorities:

The public is more aware of

economic unfairness in the system:

In the long run, it is less expensive to

rehabilitate someone rather than to
keep the person in jail or prison.

More than three-quarters believe that

wealthy youth receive better treatment
than poor youth, and more than 8 in 10
consider it a serious issue if they were told
that wealthy youth are less likely than
poor youth to be locked up for the same
crimes.

Most juveniles who commit crimes

have the potential to be rehabilitated
and to change.

16

A substantial number of respondents

also found convincing messages that
speak to youths potential for
change:
Juvenile offenders often have
emotional problems and need
counseling, not prison.

The public considers racial

inequalities and economic unfairness
as equally important:

Factor analysis of survey responses

indicates that attitudes about racial

The highest percentage of

respondents found these practical
messages most convincing:
A system that does little more than
lock up juveniles will lead to more
crime, not less.

More than 8 in 10 endorse requiring

diversity training for police, prosecutors,
and judges, and nearly 7 in 10 support
new guidelines for arrest, prosecution, and
sentencing to address unequal treatment.

The public is persuaded by prochange messages that are practical

and that recognize the potential for
change of youth in trouble:

For many people, however, negative

attitudes toward youth are deeply
ingrained:

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

In the FrameWorks focus groups, adults

regularly discounted positive statistics
about youth and instead focused on a few
negative trends.

Locking up juvenile offenders sends

a message to other juveniles that will
make them think twice before
committing a crime.

Messages that appeared to be

excuses for criminal conduct were
not convincing:

Many teenagers who commit crimes

were abused and neglected when they
were young.

The poll found that the public does not

find the public safety argument, i.e.
locking up juvenile offenders send a
message to the community that we will be
safe from crime very convincing.

Its only natural for people to make

mistakes when they are young.

The public was less convinced by

messages that cite statistics:

For example, the public was less

convinced by the statistical argument that
ninety-four percent of juveniles arrested
are arrested for non-violent crimes. And
they gave little credence to the notion that
most juveniles who commit crimes are
first time offenders and do not commit
another crime.

Much of the public also finds

convincing those messages that
focus on accountability and
consequences for young people:

The public does not find the

straightforward public safety
argument very convincing:

The public supports court-imposed

consequences for young offenders
that stress responsibility and
accountability:

For example, majorities believe that the

following would be very effective in
rehabilitation efforts:
(1) Requiring youth to meet with their
victims to understand the impact of their
crimes.
(2) Requiring youth to compensate their
victims for their loss.
3) Requiring youth participation in
mentoring programs with adult role models.

Victims of a crime have a right to see

that the offender is punished, no matter
(4) Requiring youth to do community
how young he or she is.
service.
If we react in a tough way the first
time a juvenile commits a crime, the
Near majorities believe that certain
juvenile will be less likely to break the
programs would be very effective for
law in the future.
youth:
Locking up juveniles who commit
crime is the first step to rehabilitation
(1) Requiring and providing professional
because it teaches young offenders
counseling to juvenile offenders
that there are consequences for their
crimes.
17
Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

(2) Using scared straight programs in

which juveniles who commit crimes visit
adult facilities to see what they are like

The public does not believe that

incarceration is effective:

CONCLUSIONS
From the Building Blocks poll, we can
conclude that:

Only 15% said that locking them up in

juvenile facilities would be very effective
for rehabilitation.

The public also makes clear

distinctions among those who carry
messages about crime and youth,
giving highest credibility to
rehabilitated juvenile offenders and
victims of crime, high credibility to
police and judges, and least
credibility to public officials:

The public is most likely to listen to those

who have been directly involved with the
system: rehabilitated juvenile offenders
and victims of juvenile crime. Next in line
of those the public is likely to listen to are
the police and judges. Less likely are the
U.S. Department of Justice, prosecutors,
television news, and newspapers. Elected
officials are the people who the public are
least likely to listen to for information on
juvenile crime, even less likely than the
ACLU, which is regularly attacked by
politicians as soft on crime.

18

The public is ready to support an

agenda for juvenile justice reform,
but the agenda must be tied to the
publics concerns about
accountability and fairness.
The public believes that the juvenile
justice system should impose
consequences on youth who break
the law as a way of teaching them
responsibility.

Imposing accountability and

consequences, however, does not
necessarily require incarceration.

The public shows little support for

simply locking up young people.

But the public does not support the

youth excuse either.
Instead, the public supports
rehabilitation and treatment
programs because they recognize
that youth have the potential for
change and in the long run will make
our communities safer.

The public also cares about fairness.

In the Building Blocks poll in early
1999, the public, particularly
Whites, reported little awareness of
racial unfairness. Nevertheless, if
told of unfairness, all segments of
the public considered a matter of
serious concern.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

RECOMMENDATIONS
KEY MESSAGES
Based on the Building Blocks poll and
earlier polls, certain key messages
can be effectively utilized with the
public:

Acknowledge accountability

Regardless of whether the public is aware

of the data showing decreased juvenile
crime over the past seven years, the public
has a strong belief that juvenile crime is a
serious problem, and has a genuine fear of
youth violence. The public wants to feel
that young people who break the law will
face consequences. The public believes
that juvenile court often gives youth a slap
on the wrist, and consequently the public
has little faith that juvenile court will turn
youth around.
Accountability is a principle that everyone
can embrace, regardless of ideological
perspective. Advocates for youth, parents,
community organizations, public officials
and the police can all support the idea
that young people need to be held
accountable for their actions, so that they
can learn from their misdeeds and
understand that wrongdoing carries
consequences.
Acknowledging accountability at the
beginning of a public presentation has the
added benefits of establishing credibility
quickly (because it is a reasonable and
sensible principle) and disarming potential
critics (because it negates the stereotype of
mushy-thinking liberals who are only
looking for excuses for criminal behavior).
Acknowledging accountability also opens

up avenues of communication with

unusual allies such as police and victims
organizations.

Emphasize that accountability does

not necessarily mean incarceration

Holding young people accountable does

not necessarily mean locking them up.
There are many interventions, treatment
programs, and placements that impose
consequences on youth without relying on
incarceration, and the public strongly
supports treatment and rehabilitation over
incarceration.
Interventions and rehabilitation programs
vary in severity and restrictiveness. At one
end of the spectrum are performing hours
of community service, paying a fine,
compensating victims, meeting with
victims, and individualized programs such
as mentoring, counseling, and alcohol or
drug treatment, all of which can be
imposed without significant disruption to
a youths daily schedule. Other youth may
require after-school programs or other
day reporting centers that youth attend
at specific hours and receive adult
supervision. For other youth, it may be
appropriate to impose restrictions on their
movement and activities through
electronic monitoring, home detention, or
close supervision from monitors who see
or speak with youth several times a day.
Still other youth may need residential
community-based programs such as
group homes or special-needs foster care.
Only youth who are truly a danger to
themselves or the community should be
considered for incarceration, i.e., either
detained before their adjudication hearing
or committed to an institution as a
disposition of their case.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

19

There is abundant information available

on the wide range of alternatives to
incarceration.

Frame prevention and rehabilitation

as practical responses to concerns
about youth crime

The public believes that young people have

the capacity to change, and that
prevention and rehabilitation are clearly
preferable to incarceration, but messages
are more likely to be effective when they
are linked to practical benefits such as:

The public supports mentoring and

counseling programs, but the publics
concern about accountability indicates
that such programs may not be sufficient
by themselves to gain broad support.
Thus, advocates should promote
comprehensive rehabilitation efforts for
youth in trouble, including contact with
victims and individual mentoring and
counseling.

Most young offenders have the

capacity to change for the better.
A system that does little more than
lock up juvenile offenders will lead to
more crime, not less.
Spending money on rehabilitating
youth is more cost effective than
simply keeping the person in prison.

Promote rehabilitation that includes

meeting with and compensating
victims

Rehabilitation efforts that include meeting

with victims and compensating victims
provide effective consequences for young
people, promote the principle of
accountability, and receive strong support
from the public. Such efforts are an
important part of the balanced and
restorative justice model of juvenile
justice.

20

Promote rehabilitation that includes

mentoring and counseling

Inform about racial unfairness

The public reports little awareness of

racial unfairness in the juvenile justice
system, but information about such
unfairness strikes at a deeply-held belief
that the system should be fair to all youth.
This is a core American value. If presented
with such information, the public can be
moved to action. The public strongly
supports diversity training for police,
prosecutors, and judges, as well as new
guidelines for arrest, prosecution, and
sentencing to address unequal treatment.
In providing statistics about racial
unfairness, advocates must make it clear
that such data measure disparate
treatment for the same offense. Thus, the
second Building Blocks report, And Justice
for Some, found that African-American
youth adjudicated for violent offenses,
with no prior admissions to state facilities,
were committed to state institutions 9
times as often as White youth adjudicated
for violent offenses with no prior
admissions. African-American youth
adjudicated for drug offenses with no prior
admissions were committed to state
institutions 48 times as often as White

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

youth adjudicated for drug offenses with

no prior admissions. Similarly, the mean
length of stay in state institutions for
African-American youth adjudicated for
violent offenses was 90 days longer than
the mean length of stay for White youth
adjudicated for the same offenses. The
mean length of stay for Latino youth
adjudicated for violent offenses was 150
days longer than the mean for White
youth.
This is different from overrepresentation. Over-representation
usually refers to the percentage of
minority youth in the general population
compared to the percentage of minority
youth at a specific point in the justice
system. For example, since AfricanAmerican youth are 15% of the adolescent
population but 44% of the population in
juvenile detention facilities, there is overrepresentation of African-American youth
in juvenile detention facilities. But those
data do not tell us whether AfricanAmerican youth are treated differently
from White youth. It may be that AfricanAmerican youth commit more serious
crimes than White youth, which might
account for the over-representation.
Only by comparing (1) what happens to
minority youth charged with specific
offenses with (2) what happens to White
youth charged with the same type of
offenses (violent, property, drug or public
order offenses) can we determine whether
minority youth are treated differently from
White youth, and, consequently, whether
the system is racially unfair.
Thus, the Building Blocks studies report
how youth of color are treated more
harshly than White youth for the same

crimes at every critical point in the justice

system: detention, formal processing in
juvenile court, transfer to adult criminal
court, disposition (sentencing),
incarceration in juvenile facilities, and
incarceration in adult facilities.
The difference between disparate
treatment for the same offense and overrepresentation is critical to presenting
messages effectively. If advocates fail to
make it clear that racial unfairness
involves harsher treatment for the same
offense, many in the audience will dismiss
the data as evidence that minority youth
simply commit more crimes than White
youth.
In addition, advocates need to present
personal stories of young people of color
who have been in the justice system. The
public sees young people who have been
in the system as highly credible, and
personal stories put flesh on the statistics.
The Justice Policy Institutes publication,
Second Chances, featured 25 stories of
successful juvenile court graduates, can
be utilized as a model in this regard.

Link racial unfairness to economic

unfairness

The publics belief that the justice system

should treat all youth fairly also collides
with the feeling that the system treats
poor youth more harshly than wealthy
youth for the same crimes. Since poor
youth in America are disproportionately
youth of color, advocates can link racial
unfairness in the justice system with
economic unfairness. For example, poor
youth are usually represented in juvenile
court by public defenders, while wealthy
(and many middle-class) youth are

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

21

represented by private counsel. In many

jurisdictions, public defenders labor under
impossible caseloads, sometimes as high
as 500 to 1,000 cases. In such
circumstances, even the most dedicated,
hard-working, and resourceful public
defenders cannot provide effective
representation.
The third Building Blocks report, Youth
Crime/Adult Time, found that among
youth prosecuted in adult criminal court,
youth represented by public defenders
were less likely to be transferred back to
juvenile court or acquitted of the charges
than youth represented by private
counsel. Thus, many youth of color suffer
in two ways: they are treated more harshly
in the system than White youth for the
same offenses, and they are represented
by public defenders who are less able to
provide effective representation. These two
points are related: many youth end up
deeper in the system because their public
defenders do not have the resources to
mount effective defenses or arrange for
community placements.

Recognize that racial unfairness is

different from ineffectiveness of the
system

Analysis of the Building Blocks survey

results indicates that the public holds its
concerns over effectiveness of the juvenile
justice system separately from any
concerns about racial fairness. The public
wants accountability for young offenders,
and it supports rehabilitation programs
rather than incarceration, but it sees
these issues as distinct from remedies for
racial disparities. Consequently, advocates
need to address both issues.
The two issues are related, and advocates

22

can make the connection. An effective

juvenile justice system sees each youth as
an individual. It holds each individual
youth accountable for his or her own
actions, and it applies consequences that
are appropriate to the individual youth.
That promotes rehabilitation of the youth,
and ultimately promotes public safety by
helping the youth become a productive
citizen in our society. An effective juvenile
justice system does not treat individual
youths as members of a racial or ethnic
group it does not arrest or detain or
adjudicate youth because of how some
members of the group behave. Thus,
advocates should promote an effective
juvenile justice system as a means of
focusing on each youth individually and
avoiding stereotypes about youth of color.
Remedies to combat stereotyping such
as diversity training and development of
new guidelines for police and prosecutors
promote a juvenile justice system in
which each youth is judged individually.

Inform about the consequences of

prosecution of youth as adults

Focus groups indicate that the public

supports prosecution of youth in adult
criminal court as a way of assuring that
youth are held accountable for their
actions. But the public has little
awareness of the consequences of
prosecution in adult court. In a number of
states, youth prosecuted as adults are
held in adult jails before trial, and are sent
to adult prisons if convicted. Research has
documented the increased risk to youth in
adult facilities of suicide, physical and
sexual assault, and assault with a
weapon.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

It is important for advocates to present

this information to the public. The public
understands the dangers to young people
in adult jails and prisons, and feels
strongly that young people should not be
locked up with adult inmates. Advocates
should thus combine several types of
information: (1) the dangerous
consequences of prosecution in adult
court in their particular state, (2) personal
stories of young people who have been
victims of abuse in adult jails and prisons,
and (3) effective ways of providing
accountability for youth in juvenile court.
In addition, advocates can point out
examples of young people who committed
offenses, stayed in juvenile court and were
not prosecuted as adults, and have
achieved significant success in their lives.
The best source for such examples is
Second Chances: Giving Kids a Chance to
Make a Better Choice, prepared by the
Childrens Court Centennial
Communications Project, and available at
the Center for Juvenile and Criminal
Justice website, www.cjcj.org (Publications
July, 1999). The examples include
individuals who got into trouble when they
were young but went on to become
prominent public officials, judges,
professional athletes, Olympic champions,
even a U.S. Senator. (For examples, see
the sample materials section for opinion
editorials from former youth offenders
Brandon Maxwell, Bob Beamon, Terence
Hallinan and Jeremy Estrada).

responsible for their crimes, or that young

people often make mistakes. Advocates are
more likely to be effective with messages
about the importance of rehabilitation and
the potential of young people to change.

Dont rely on statistics alone

Statistics such as the fact that 94% of all

juvenile arrests each year are for nonviolent offenses appear dramatic, but they
are not persuasive in themselves. This is
true for several reasons. First, the public
is skeptical in general about the use of
statistics to make an argument, and often
questions the source of the data. Second,
even if the public accepts the statistics, it
is still very concerned about the violent
crimes that young people do commit.
Third, fear of violent crime is a powerful
emotion, and the numbers do not override
that emotional response.
This does not mean that advocates should
avoid statistics altogether. Advocates
should use data such as those on the
relatively small percentage of juvenile
arrests for violent crimes, and on the
significant racial disparities in how White
youth and youth of color are treated in the
system for the same offense, but they
should use the data in conjunction with
acknowledgment of the need for
accountability, with solid information
about effective programs as alternatives to
incarceration and the dangers of
prosecution as adults, and personal
stories to illustrate the messages.

Avoid the youth excuse

The Building Blocks survey found that the

public is less persuaded by arguments
that young offenders have been abused or
neglected, that they are too young to be

Use these key words and concepts

when communicating your message
to the public:

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

23

The public opinion research indicates that

these words and concepts resonate well
with the public:

Rehabilitation
Counseling
Potential to change
Victims rights
Consequences
Community service
Mentoring
Prevent youth from being housed
with adults
Youth do not belong in prison

much more positive reaction than negative

(although the FrameWorks poll found
strongly negative associations to the
word). In the Building Blocks poll, public
reaction to kids was about equally
positive or neutral, with somewhat less
negative reaction. But the term juvenile
was strongly negative: three times as
many people saw it as negative as saw it
positive. From the focus groups it was
evident that the term juvenile is
associated with juvenile delinquent, and
therefore carries a very negative image

KEY MESSENGERS
Avoid these key words and concepts
when communicating your message to
the public:
These words and concepts do not resonate
well with the public:

Statistics to show incidence of nonviolent or first-time offenders

Youth excuses such as:
Abuse early in life
Youthful mistakes
Immaturity

The public does not clearly understand

these key words and concepts:

Prosecute as adults
Group homes
Juvenile facilities
Non-violent
Juvenile justice system

Avoid using the term juvenile

In the Building Blocks poll, the terms

youth and young people elicited
strongly positive reactions and little in the
way of negatives. Teenagers also brought

24

Based on the Building Blocks poll and

earlier polls, certain key messengers
should be utilized when conveying
juvenile justice reform messages to the
public:

Put a face on the problem through

personal stories of incarcerated
youth

As noted earlier, one of the best ways to

illustrate abuses in the juvenile justice
system is to put faces on the issues. It is
important to tell personal stories.
Advocates should work with young people
who have been in the system to convey the
dangers of overcrowded, ill-equipped
juvenile facilities, as well as the perils of
jailing young people with adult inmates.
(For an example, see the sample materials
section for the Building Blocks fact sheet,
Dangers of Incarcerating Youth With
Adults.)
The Building Blocks survey indicates that
many people would be moved by such
stories to promote juvenile justice reform.
These stories can be extremely powerful.
When Congress in recent years has

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

considered federal legislation to amend the

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention Act to allow more jailing of
children with adult inmates, one of the
most potent strategies by advocates has
been to present personal stories of abuse
by young people and accounts of suicides
by grieving parents. (For an example, see
the sample materials section for the Youth
Law Center press release with quotes from
Janice Peterman, a parent of a youth who
committed suicide in an adult jail).

Beamon, Terence Hallinan and Jeremy

Estrada).

The public is also very receptive to stories

about young people who have turned their
lives around local examples of the
Second Chances stories mentioned earlier
in this guide. (For examples, see the
sample materials section for opinion
editorials from former youth offenders
Brandon Maxwell, Bob Beamon, Terence
Hallinan and Jeremy Estrada).

Use appropriate messengers such as

rehabilitated juvenile offenders and
their parents and victims of crime

The Building Blocks survey demonstrates

that the public is most receptive to
messages presented by those who have
been directly involved in the system:
rehabilitated juvenile offenders and their
parents, and victims of crime. The public
also gives significant credibility to the
police and judges. The public is much less
likely to be persuaded by the U.S.
Department of Justice, prosecutors,
television news, or newspapers. Elected
officials are the least credible with the
public for information on juvenile crime,
even less credible than the ACLU. (For
examples, see the sample materials
section for opinion editorials from former
youth offenders Brandon Maxwell, Bob

Advocates should be aware of these

differences, and plan their presentations
accordingly: a young person or parent who
tells their story in the system, or a crime
victim who wants to reduce crime by
promoting effective juvenile justice
reforms, may be much more effective than
a politician who has high namerecognition.
Recruit unusual allies such as police,
prosecutors and victims
organizations

Some advocates for young people in the

juvenile justice system have been reticent
about developing alliances with the police,
prosecutors, and victims organizations.
They have assumed that they have no
common ground with such proprosecution groups.
Advocates should understand that all
segments in the community have a strong
interest in developing an effective juvenile
justice system that has broad public
support. An effective juvenile justice
system makes the community safer by
enabling youth in trouble to turn their
lives around, without exposing them
unnecessarily to the corrupting influence
of violent offenders or adult inmates.
Many police, prosecutors, and victims
organizations recognize this, and support
effective juvenile justice reforms. Thus,
advocates for young people should seek
out allies in law enforcement and victims
organizations to cooperate on reform
efforts.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

25

MESSAGING

Communicate clear and

straightforward messages

Advocates should develop an over-arching

message which has the following elements:
(1) The message states the problem in
terms of a system that is running contrary
to our values (e.g., fairness);
(2) The message states the solution in
terms that are consistent with our values
and describe practical steps to bringing
about reform.

than white youth for the same crimes. Too

often, the system unfairly dooms minority
youth to abusive confinement and no
opportunity for rehabilitation.
(5) We must correct this injustice with
measures to address the unequal
treatment of young people of color,
measures such as new guidelines for
arrest, detention, prosecution, and
sentencing that reduce racial bias and
overcome racial stereotypes.
Use these messages proactively and
look for opportunities to communicate
your juvenile justice reform message to
the public through the media

Here are some examples:

(1) Society is giving up on young lives and
we are all paying a high price. Locking up
young people in trouble in dirty,
dangerous, overcrowded facilities, and
with adult criminals, is costly and
counter-productive. It creates criminals of
the future.
(2) We must rehabilitate young people in
trouble. Most youth have the potential to
change, and it is less costly and more
effective to turn their lives around through
rehabilitation programs than to continue
to arrest them and lock them up.
(3) Rehabilitation should include programs
that teach young people that there are
consequences for their actions. Young
people who commit crimes should be held
accountable to their victims and to the
community in ways that are effective
simply locking them up is not effective.
(4) Americas juvenile justice system must
be fair and effective. But right now, young
people of color are treated more harshly

26

Dont wait until the next school shooting

to respond with these messages, create
your own media event and communicate
your pro-active message to the public. Use
the sample talking points on juvenile
justice reform issues included as a guide
the next time you prepare to speak at a
public event, meet with your local
newspapers editorial board, give
testimony at a hearing with state
legislators, or at your next statewide
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention State Advisory Group meeting.
For suggestions on these potential
opportunities, see the sample materials
section for the document, A Sample of
Juvenile Justice Calendar Events: Annual
Events that You Can Use to Publicize
Juvenile Justice Issues, Every Year.
For general guidelines on working with the
media, see the Media Guide for Youth
Advocates, published by the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP), and available on the

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

OJJDP website at: http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

jcci/mediakit.html.
Train the messengers to utilize the
key messages in this guide
For example, you can use the power point
presentation that accompanies this guide
to present the public opinion findings to
youth, juvenile justice colleagues, parents
groups, and unusual allies.

CASE EXAMPLES
THE MARYLAND CAMPAIGN TO
CLOSE CHELTENHAM
Background
Opened in 1872 as the House of
Reformation for Colored Boys, the
Cheltenham youth detention center is a
towering symbol of racial injustice in the
state of Maryland. Although 17% of
Marylands youth population are black
males and black males make up 39% of
youth arrests in Maryland, fully 81% of
the youth in Cheltenham are African
American boys. Over the years,
Cheltenham had a series of scandals and
abuses that generated coverage in the
local newspapers. At one point, the facility
was so over crowded that it held over 300
youth although it had a 167 bed capacity.
Cottages that were designed to hold 24
youth were stuffed with 100 youth, with
only 3 or 4 staff members supervising the
cottages.
A fire safety inspector repeatedly
recommended that Cheltenham be closed,
and issued a report recommending its
closure. Because the building is so old, all

of the cells have to be opened individually

by keys. In one fire inspection report, the
fire inspector indicated that the
Cheltenham facility staff couldnt find the
keys to many of the youths cells. The
facility had numerous dead end
corridors that could become literal dead
ends in the event of a fire.
In addition to fire and health safety
problems, a staff member at Cheltenham
stabbed a youth on New Years Day in
2001. Several months earlier, a boy was
repeatedly raped at Cheltenham. Children
were routinely brutalized and beaten by
other youth and staff. One worker
reported that suicide watch kids were
placed in isolation because there was not
enough staff to supervise them.
Advocates Take Action
After the Secretary of Marylands
Department of Juvenile Justice publicly
stated that the facility should be razed
because of its deplorable conditions, the
Maryland Juvenile Justice coalition took a
number of steps to push for Cheltenhams
permanent closure. The coalition formed
the Maryland Campaign to Close
Cheltenham, involving parents of
incarcerated youth, youth, activists, and
faith leaders from all over the state. With
support of the Building Blocks for Youth
initiative, the coalition devised and
delivered key messages to the public
through a media advocacy campaign,
mobilized individuals and organizations all
over the state to attend several highly
publicized events, and reached out to
thousands of concerned citizens through
an e-activist approach utilizing a new
campaign website to get basic campaign
information, facts, press materials, and

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

27

take action steps such as signing up to

join the campaign and receive campaign
updates via email, sending email letters to
key decision makers and signing an online petition.
Delivering the Message
Advocates utilized key messages based on
what the public supports such as
incarceration is an ineffective approach to
reducing youth violence, rehabilitation
over incarceration, and racial fairness.
The messages also focused on abusive
conditions at the facility and realistic
solutions to closing the facility and
proposed alternatives to incarceration.
To deliver these messages, advocates
organized three major events involving key
messengers, such as parents of
incarcerated youth, youth, and faith
leaders.
First, advocates organized a press
conference call calling for the closure of
the facility and launching a campaign
website and issued a press statement.
Cheltenham is no place for kids. My son
needed help, but Cheltenham provided no
drug or rehabilitative programs. Instead,
he was beaten and neglected. Its
dangerous, it doesnt work and it should
be shut down, says Linda Conway, a
spokesperson for the campaign on the
press conference call and a mother from
Prince Georges County whose son was
beaten during his four months at
Cheltenham for a non-violent offense. (For
the full statement, see Appendix or visit:
http://www.closecheltenham.org/
022201_pressrelease.html)

28

Second, faith leaders from all over the

state called on their congregations to get
on the bus to meet with key decision
makers to push them to take steps during
a critical time period when the legislature
makes final decisions about the states
budget. A spokesperson for the campaign,
Reverend Gregory Perkins, President of the
Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance
stated, Cheltenham is one of the last
symbols of Marylands segregationist Jim
Crow policies, and is a painful reminder of
continuing inequality for minority children
in the juvenile justice system. Enough is
enough. We need to shut down the facility,
and bring our children home to programs
that work. (For the full statement, see
Appendix or visit:
http://www.closecheltenham.org/
030101_pressrelease.html)
Finally, advocates held a rally and testified
at the legislature during the budget
hearing on the Department of Juvenile
Justices budget. A spokesperson for the
campaign, Jim McComb, President of the
Maryland Juvenile Justice Coalition
stated, Maryland legislators have an
historic opportunity to close down the
dangerous Cheltenham facility, and
implement sound policies that help our
kids turn their lives around, and more
effectively build and protect our
communities. (For the full statement, see
Appendix or visit:
http://www.closecheltenham.org/
030501_pressrelease.html)
The Results
The ultimate outcome of the campaign
was legislation enacted by the legislature
through the annual budget process to
phase down and eventually close the

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

facility, and significant increases in

funding for alternative community-based
programs for youth. Through this public
campaign, the Maryland press covered the
story and reported on the major events
organized by the activists. For the full
press coverage, see the Appendex or visit:
http://www.closecheltenham.org/
newsdesk.html. Thousands of Maryland
citizens contacted key decision makers by
sending letters, calling, and signing the
on-line petition.
Lessons Learned
Seize political opportunities:
Cheltenhams disgraceful history as a
segregated correctional center combined
with recent scandals and abuse made it
an easy target for media and advocacy
efforts. Advocates had always painted the
facility as a dangerous and inappropriate
place for children, and had recommended
its closure. The seed advocates had
planted began to grow when a number of
conditions combined to create a political
opportunity ripe for closure the
Juvenile Justice Secretary publicly stated
that the facility should be demolished, a
report by the fire department
recommended its closure due to
hazardous conditions, and one youth was
raped and another stabbed while in
detention. Youth advocates immediately
seized the opportunity, and began to
mobilize a public campaign.
Many Messengers, One Message:
One of the greatest strengths of the
campaign was its diversity and breadth.
Juvenile justice advocates were joined by
ministers, civil rights organizations, youth
groups, prison activists, social service
providers, parents of incarcerated youth

and national experts all calling for the

closure of the facility. The campaign
appealed to communities who most care
about the issue of juvenile justice, and
mobilized them in a cohesive, powerful
and effective campaign of diverse citizens
who effectively communicated the need to
shut down the facility.
Successful Advocacy Requires Effective
Media Strategy:
During the course of the campaign, the
legislative and advocacy strategy was
intimately tied to the media work. Local
media outlets in the districts of individual
legislators and decision makers were high
priority targets. Reporters at influential
news outlets were pitched, opinion pieces
were placed, letters to the editors were
written, editorials were solicited, and
spokespeople were placed on radio shows.
In addition to attempting to move key
decision makers, the media effort also
dovetailed outreach and mobilization
efforts. Media outlets that most directly
reached natural constituents were
targeted with strategic messages. For
example, the Afro, an African American
newspaper in Baltimore (where most of the
youth in Cheltenham came from), ran
stories, op eds, and editorialized about the
campaign. Many of these papers even
explained how readers could become
involved in the campaign by directing
them to call the legislature and take action
through the campaigns website.
Target Your Message: Different
Audiences, Different Messages:
In the media advocacy efforts focused on
the Baltimore community papers and
African American outlets, the message
highlighted disproportionate minority

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

29

confinement and the historical racial

injustices at Cheltenham.
In Montgomery County, where the
population is largely, white, upper middle
class, and somewhat progressive, the
media advocacy messages emphasized
that Cheltenham is no place for children
by highlighting the fire hazards and
physical/sexual abuses occurring there.
Highlight Personal Stories:
The advocates provided reporters with
individual stories that would put a human
face to the issues we were talking about. A
mother of a son who was incarcerated in
the facility described a day she went to
visit her son when he was covered in
bruises and cuts from a beating he
received while guards stood by and
watched. A teacher who used to instruct
youth in the facility described the severe
lack of resources such as books that made
teaching near impossible. An intake officer
talked about the ways in which sick
children with health issues were held in
the infirmary with violent offenders. All of
these stories were told to reporters.
The advocates also negotiated a dramatic
and powerful exclusive with the
Washington Post to guarantee coverage.
Youth advocates and the media team
worked with the family of the youth who
had been brutally raped in the facility to
help them share their story with the press.
The childs anonymity was protected, and
the family was accompanied during all
interviews. The result was a prominent
story in a widely-read and well-respected
paper that otherwise might not have
covered the campaign.

30

Build and Maintain Momentum:

Advocates carefully planned their media
strategy, emphasizing building momentum
in the efforts. For example, advocates first
organized an initial telephone press
conference call to announce the campaign
and the launch the website,
www.closecheltehnham.org. The press
conference phone call featured a parent,
an expert, a teacher and former staff
person, an intake officer, and a state
legislator who all called for the facilitys
closure. The press covered the event,
featuring the formation of the coalition,
and all mentioned the website (which
greatly helped outreach and organizing
efforts.)
The following week, advocates held a press
conference to announce the endorsement
of an alliance of over 200 Baltimore
ministers. The Associated Press, state and
local dailies, alternative weeklies, and all
the local TV stations attended and covered
the conference. The endorsement of the
ministers broadened the base of the
coalition, and demonstrated growing
support for the effort to close down the
facility.
Finally, advocates encouraged press to
attend a budget hearing where coalition
members testified about the need to close
Cheltenham. Outside of the hearings, a
group of youth and prison activists
created a great photo opportunity as they
kept vigil over the hearings with colorful
signs and puppets. All of the major media
events suggested a building campaign to
close the facility.
Use All Available Media:
The media outreach for the campaign
targeted the broad spectrum of media

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

outlets available. Advocates established a

website with up-to-date information, new
coverage and press releases to keep all
reporters easily informed. Larger state
daily papers were targeted, as well as
smaller but important community and
African American papers. News radio
shows ran stories, and ministers spoke
about the campaign on religious radio
stations. Evening news programs ran
television stories about the campaign, as
did local cable access channels. A few,
carefully selected advertisements were run
in less expensive, targeted newspapers,
urging readers to call their legislators and
demand the facilitys closure. In short, all
available media was used for a total
market saturation of the Close
Cheltenham campaign.

THE LOUISIANA CAMPAIGN TO

CLOSE TALLULAH

Background
Opened in 1995, the Tallulah Correctional
Center for youth has been a national
scandal for the human rights violations of
children incarcerated there, earning the
distinction as the worst in the nation
with the New York Times. The facility was
the business venture of three private
businessmen with no experience running
a prison. In the first three years of its
existence, Tallulah youth participated in
four major rebellions, demanding basic
supplies such as adequate food and
protections from abuse. In 1999, things
were so unsafe for the youth, and the
guards, that staff actually walked off of
their posts and left more than 400
incarcerated boys unsupervised.
Representatives from he department of

corrections were flown in by helicopter to

handle the situation.
In 1998 the Justice Department sued the
state of Louisiana for violating the civil
rights of youth held in state custody,
marking the first time the federal
government actively sued a state over the
conditions of its juvenile facilities. As part
of the settlement, the state took over the
facility and promised more money to clean
up the conditions.
But two years later, Boys with shattered
jaws and broken noses routinely appear in
Tallulahs infirmary. The facility has no
competent psychologist to treat the 450
youth with behavioral disorders,
depression and histories of childhood
abuse and trauma. And even though the
state has run the facility since 1995, the
private owners still managed to make $9
million off of the misery of youth. A local
state senator has called for the closure of
the facility.
Advocates Take Action
To end the horrendous abuses in the
Tallulah facility, the Juvenile Justice
Project of Louisiana joined the Federal
Department of Justice in a lawsuit against
the state of Louisiana for human right
violations in the juvenile facility. Out of
the lawsuit came a prominent national
investigative story in the New York Times,
which referred to Tallulah as the nations
worst juvenile prison and detailed the
specific abuses children suffered in the
facility. Youth advocates launched a
project to change Louisianas juvenile
justice policy on the state level from one
that relies almost exclusively on
incarceration to a system that focuses on

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

31

community based alternatives to

incarceration. JJPL helped to coordinate
parents of Louisianas incarcerated
children to help them better advocate for
their individual children as well as
effectively push for broader reforms in the
juvenile justice system. The parents group
took shape, the Parents and Friends of
Louisianas Incarcerated Children, and
organized creative and high-energy media
event organized by the parents to call for
the closure of the Tallulah facility and
more rehabilitative programs for
Louisianas youth.
Delivering the Message
From the early stages of advocacy and
reform, advocates and parents utilized
publicly palatable key message to call to
for the closure of the facility, and for more
investment in community based programs.
The messages emphasized that children
are brutalized in the facility, and that they
do not receive the rehabilitation, medical
or mental health treatment that they need.
The messages also indicated that better
options exist to hold children accountable
and help them turn lives around.
To deliver the message, advocates
emphasized the deplorable conditions of
the facility and the better options that
exist to treat children in all of their work
with the media.
The parents group generated news by
using holidays as media hooks and
creative events. On Fathers Day, one
father wrote a moving opinion article
about how he was unable to visit his son
who was incarcerated in Tallulah for drug
abuse. He vividly described his families
suffering and that palpable fear in his

32

sons voice who was afraid of being beaten.

The op ed delivered the key message that
young people should be responsible for
their action, but also no child should be
brutalized: While young people should be
held accountable for their actions, I do not
believe that a child should be punished
with physical and emotional abuse.
The parents also organized a Jazz
Funeral to symbolize the dying dreams
and opportunities for Louisianas
Children, and to call for Tallulah RIP.
Over 60 families, youth, citizens and
supporters marched down the streets of
New Orleans behind a horse drawn
carriage carrying a coffin, and bearing
signs calling for the closure of Tallulah.
The very name and nature of the media
event dramatically communicated the key
message that children hopes and dreams
for a better future were dying in
Louisianas facilities.
In all of the interviews with the media on
the jazz funeral, media spokespeople
emphasized the message that children
deserve a second chance, and that
Louisiana facilities destroy dreams instead
of rehabilitate children: Avis Brock, a
parent organizer, told the New Orleans
Times Picayune: Before we lock our kids
up, we need to be able to look ourselves in
the mirror and say weve done all we can
for this child. The funeral procession was
followed by moving presentations from key
messengers such as parents and formally
incarcerated youth, who shared their
personal stories of childrens abuse and
neglect and called for the closure of
Tallulah. The personal stories of the
parents and youth communicated the
need to close the facility in a powerful and
more compelling way than data ever could.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Also, all of the materials and interviews

consistently referred to incarcerated young
people as youth, or children instead of
juveniles. One mother described how her
son had his jaw broken in the facility, and
how even she was afraid to visit:
[Tallulah] is nowhere you want to go.I
hated to go there. I wanted to see my
child, but I didnt want to go there.
The event was covered by all four local
television stations, who interviewed the
key messengers: a parent, a rehabilitated
youth offender, a local judge, and a
politician. Senator Donald Cravins, Chair
of the Judiciary B committee which
oversees corrections, called for closing
Tallulah, and point to a sensible and
realizable alternatives. Cravins op-ed
referenced another Louisiana juvenile
facility that had successfully been closed:
By working closely with corrections
officials, police, prosecutors and the
community, the Jena youth prison was
safely closed in only six weeks, and the
youth were moved into rigorously
monitored community-and-family-based
programs or other facilitiesWe should
spend the next 12 months planning to
replicate the Jena success story and to
support, empower and prepare a cluster of
local treatment programs to give the
states troubled youth a chance to turn
their lives around. Parents placed flowers
on the coffin to symbolize the dying
dreams of incarcerated children, and the
jazz funeral ended on a celebratory note as
everybody danced for justice and waved
Tallulah RIP handkerchiefs in the air.
The celebration at the end communicated
hope for childrens future. The jazz funeral
received major media attention before and
after the event, and all of the coverage
reflected the core messages of the jazz

funeral. The Monday following the event,

the Times Picayune editorialized in favor
of closing down Tallulah: Violence within
prisons in no way contributes to the
rehabilitation of young offenders, which is
supposed to be the primary goals of the
juvenile justice systemIf the state cant
figure out how to run the prison in a
manner that is humane to inmates and
their families, it ought to shut Tallulah
down.
The Results
The work of the advocates to has planted
the seeds for the future reform of
Louisianas juvenile justice policy. With
the help of JJPL, Senator Cravins
successfully authored a joint resolution
calling for the creation of a study
commission to conduct an assessment of
the Louisiana juvenile justice system. The
advocates work with the parents has built
up local and community leaders to stage
major events, speak effectively to the
public and the media, and to tie message
to strategic reforms. As a result of the
consistent messaging on the need for more
rehabilitative programs in the state and
the call to close Tallulah, the media has
shifted to editorialize in favor of closing
the facility.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

33

PRESS RELEASE

FEBRUARY 22, 2001

Contact: Laura Jones, 202-737-7270, x254 or Cell: 202-425-4659

Or Sharon Rubinstein, 410-547-9200, x3024

Maryland Coalition Launches Campaign and

New Website to Close Cheltenham Youth Facility
Calls on Legislators to Commit to One Year Phase Out Plan
to Move Youth to Treatment Programs and New Facilities
Annapolis, MDA diverse coalition of parents, childrens advocates, juvenile justice
organizations, youth activists and citizens today announced a campaign to shut down
Cheltenham Youth Detention Center, Marylands Worst Youth Prison. The coalitions new
website argues that the 129-year old institution is beyond repair, and that the youth should
be moved from Cheltenham into community-based rehabilitation programs and newer
facilities. The coalition will host a variety of events culminating in a rally at the Cheltenham
facility and a lobby day in Annapolis on March 5th.
Grievances listed on www.closecheltenham.org include: lack of adequate mental health
services and treatment programs; grossly inadequate education services; dangers due to
inadequate fire safety equipment; staff neglect and incompetence resulting in abuse and
rape; failure to rehabilitate youth, nearly 90% of whom are at the facility for non-violent
offenses; and the disproportionate confinement of minority youth.
Linda Conway, a mother from Prince Georges County whose son was beaten during his
four months at Cheltenham for a non-violent offense, said: Cheltenham is no place for
kids. My son needed help, but Cheltenham provided no drug or rehabilitative programs.
Instead, he was beaten and neglected. Its dangerous, it doesnt work and it should be shut
down.
Opened in 1872 as the House of Reformation for Colored Boys, Cheltenham has a long
history of scandal. One boy was stabbed on New Years Day 2001 by a staff member, and
another boy was repeatedly raped in different rooms of the facility within the last year. A
recent fire safety report recommended that the building be closed, and Juvenile Justice
Secretary Bishop Robinson said that it should be demolished.

34

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Montgomery County Delegate Sharon Grosfeld said, Cheltenham should have been closed
a long time ago. Cheltenham is a disaster, not only for the facility but most especially for
the boys in that facility. I am a mother, and we dont want to treat any child the way
Cheltenham treats the children in its facility.
The coalition has called on Maryland legislators to commit to a gradual one-year phase out
plan, which would reallocate resources from Cheltenham into community-based programs.
Cheltenham youth would be placed in treatment programs, or moved into a new 144-bed
facility opening in Baltimore in 2002. In 1986, Maryland successfully closed the Montrose
Training School in only eight months. While the Department of Juvenile Justice reports
80% rearrest rates for youth coming out of their locked institutions, only 20% of the youth
diverted from Montrose into community programs were rearrested.
###

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

35

PRESS RELEASE

MARCH 1, 2001

Contact: Laura Jones, 202-737-7270, x254 or Cell: 202-425-4659

Or Sharon Rubinstein, 410-547-9200, x3024

More Than 200 Pastors Endorse the Campaign to Close

Cheltenham
Call on Congregants, Families of Youth in Cheltenham to
Get On the Bus to Rally the Facility, Lobby in Annapolis on March 5th
Baltimore, MDThe citizens campaign to close the Cheltenham youth facility picked up
powerful allies today with the endorsement of more than 200 pastors during the monthly
meeting of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance of Baltimore and Vicinity (IMA), an
inter- denominational, inter-faith and inter-racial alliance. The ministers announced their
efforts to turn out congregants and families of youth in Cheltenham to Get on the Bus to
rally at the facility and lobby in Annapolis on March 5th. Juvenile justice sectary Bishop
Robison spoke at the press conference, and supported the closure of Cheltenham.
Among others, the ministers cited their primary grievances as the disproportionate
confinement of youth of color in Cheltenham, and the facilitys remote location from
Baltimore families, whose children make up about one half of Cheltenhams population.
Although African American males make up only 17% of Marylands youth population and
39% of youth arrests, they make up 81% of the youth confined Cheltenham. Cheltenham
was opened in 1872 as the House of Reformation for Colored Boys. Cheltenham is over 50
miles from Baltimore. Its inaccessibility to families and clergy is a serious barrier to the
type of healing and reconciliation that the ministers consider key to the youths
rehabilitation.
Cheltenham is one of the last symbols of Marylands segregationist Jim Crow policies, and
is a painful reminder of continuing inequality for minority children in the juvenile justice
system, said Reverend Gregory Perkins, President of the IMA. Enough is enough. We need
to shut down the facility, and bring our children home to programs that work.

36

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

The coalition lists its primary concerns as: abuse and neglect of the youth confined in the
facility; lack of adequate mental health services and treatment programs; grossly
inadequate education services; dangers due to inadequate fire safety equipment; staff
neglect and incompetence; and failure to rehabilitate youth, nearly 90% of whom are at the
facility for non-violent offenses.
The coalition has called on Maryland legislators to commit to a gradual one-year phase out
plan, which would reallocate resources from Cheltenham into community-based programs.
Cheltenham youth would be placed in treatment programs, or moved into a new 144-bed
facility opening in Baltimore in 2002. A small number would remain at one remaining
cottage, while the rest would be replaced with a modern, 24-bed facility.
###
For more information about the campaign to close Cheltenham, visit www.closecheltenham.org, or contact:
Laura Jones, 202-737-7270, 254 or cell: 202-425-4659; or Sharon Rubinstein, 410-547-9200, x3024.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

37

PRESS RELEASE

MARCH 5, 2001

Contact: Laura Jones, 202-737-7270, x254 or Cell: 202-425-4659

Or Sharon Rubinstein, 410-547-9200, x3024
Clergy, Students, Parents and Citizens Lobby Legislators to Close Cheltenham
Annapolis, MDThe citizens campaign to close the Cheltenham youth facility held a high
energy and spirited lobby day today during the House Budget Hearing on the Department of
Juvenile Justices Budget. Bearing puppets, signs and other creative props, the group of
ministers, students, parents, and concerned citizens called on Maryland legislators to
commit to a one-year phase out program to close Cheltenham.
The coalition asked the budget committee to shift funding out of the Cheltenham facility,
and instead invest in community and family based rehabilitative and treatment programs.
The coalition also called on the Governor and Lt. Governor to assure that all funds saved
from the closure of Cheltenham be earmarked in the Department of Juvenile Justice
budget to fund rigorous and effective alternatives to detention.
Maryland legislators have an historic opportunity to close down the dangerous
Cheltenham facility, and implement sound policies that help our kids turn their lives
around, and more effectively build and protect our communities, said Jim McComb,
President of the Maryland Juvenile Justice Coalition.
The coalitions phase out plan is modeled after the 1986 closure of the Montrose Training
School, which was shut down in only 8 months. While the Department of Juvenile Justice
reports 80% rearrest rates for youth coming out of their locked institutions, only 20% of the
youth diverted from Montrose into community programs were rearrested. Cheltenham
youth could be placed in treatment programs, or moved into a new 144-bed facility opening
in Baltimore in 2002. The coalition is recommending that one 24-bed facility remain open
for Prince Georges County and southern Maryland youth.
Reverend Gregory Perkins, president of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, said,
Cheltenham is a sad testimony to our societys continuing racial disparities. Like all
systems of injustice, Cheltenham should be closed.

38

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Although African American males make up only 17% of Marylands youth population and
39% of youth arrests, they make up 81% of the youth confined Cheltenham. Cheltenham
was opened in 1872 as the House of Reformation for Colored Boys, and is one of the states
remaining symbols of the Jim Crow segregationist era. Cheltenham is over 50 miles from
Baltimore where most of the youth come from.
The coalition lists its primary concerns as: abuse and neglect of the youth confined in the
facility; the disparate confinement of minority youth; lack of adequate mental health
services and treatment programs; grossly inadequate education services; dangers due to
inadequate fire safety equipment; staff neglect and incompetence; and failure to rehabilitate
youth, nearly 90% of whom are at the facility for non-violent offenses.
###
For more information about the campaign to close Cheltenham, visit www.closecheltenham.org, or contact:
Laura Jones, 202-737-7270, 254 or cell: 202-425-4659; or Sharon Rubinstein, 410-547-9200, x3024.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

39

Families and Friends of Louisianas Incarcerated Youth

822 Camp Street
New Orleans, Louisiana 70130
(504) 522-5437

MEDIA ADVISORY
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 28, 2001
Contact: Gina Womack, (504) 522-5437
Avis Brock, (504) 527-0063

Parents Hold Jazz Funeral to Mourn the

Departed Dreams of Louisianas Incarcerated Youth
TALLULAH RIP! Rally for the Closure of Tallulah Youth Facility, Call for Alternatives
To Incarceration

Families of Louisianas Incarcerated Children is an advocacy and support group of parents

and concerned citizens calling for less incarceration of Louisianas youth, the closure of the
Tallulah facility, and more investment in rehabilitation and less incarceration.
###

40

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

Close Tallulah Now!

A Peoples Campaign to Close Louisianas Worst Youth Prison
Kids lives are at stake. Tallulah is a dangerous and violent facility where children
are more likely to be neglected, beaten or raped than receive the education and
treatment they need. Tallulahs children are routinely brought to the hospital for
broken jaws, smashed teeth, and major cuts and bruises.
$25 Million down the drain. Hard-earned taxpayers money is wasted on a
facility that profits businessmen, and does not rehabilitate kids or protect our
communities. These kids would be better treated in community and family based
programs that have been proven to rehabilitate youth.
Better options exist. 60% of the youth detained in Tallulah are non-violent
offenders. Housing them in an ill-equipped dangerous facility like Tallulah is criminal.
Community-based treatment programs for non-violent youth can provide higher
quality educational services, reduce recidivism rates and cut costs. Kids need
treatment and trainingnot bruises and abuseto help them turn their lives around.
Tallulah has never worked, and it never will. Built in 1995 as one of the
largest youth prisons in the country, Tallulah has now earned the distinction as
one of our nations worst facilities. Things were so bad that the federal government
stepped in to sue the state. For the last two years, Tallulah has been under federal
watch but little has improved for the kids that continue to get beaten and abused.
Weve closed youth jails before, and we should do it again with Tallulah. In
2000, Jena was safely closed in only 6 weeks. Tallulah should be closed in the
next 12 months by moving the kids into rigorously monitored community and
family based programs, or other facilities. We cannot risk another kids safety to
delaywe need a plan to close Tallulah now, and move our kids into programs
that work.
Families and Friends of Louisianas Incarcerated Children is an advocacy
and support group calling for less incarceration of Louisianas youth, and more
investment in community-based treatment and rehabilitation programs.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

41

Key Dates in Juvenile Justice

Calendar of Events
Annual Events that You Can Use To Publicize
Juvenile Justice Issues, Every Year
September
Labor Day
Jobs Not Jails for Our Youth. Student Employment Programs versus Zero Tolerance
Policies.
Back to School
Schools not Jails or Books Not Bars campaign against increased investment in jails
while decreased spending on education
Treatment and Education, not Incarceration campaign to show that education and
treatment programs more effective and less costly than incarceration
School shooting statistics (e.g. CJCJ School House Hype study)

October
Columbus Day
Highlight disparate confinement of First Nations/Native American youth
Halloween
Ghost, goblins and goules arent as scary as a life without second chances for kids in
adult jails

November
Annual Release of DOJ National Juvenile Crime Data
Thanksgiving
Publicize non-violent kids who cant be with their families because they are incarcerated.
Thankful op-ed from a kid who went through the juvenile system talking about the lost
opportunities for youth tried as adults.

December
Christmas
Publicize non-violent kids who cant be with their families because they are in adult
jails.

42

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

January
State Political Events
Legislative Calendar
Follow bills, budgets, etc
State of the State Address
Swearing in of New Governors
Martin Luther King Day
Racial Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System

February
Presidents Day
Point out presidential programs/policies negatively impacting kids in the adult or
juvenile systems (e.g. enforcement of barring student loans to youth with drug felony
convictions).
Black History Month
Racial Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System
Success stories (Juvenile System vs. Adult System)
March
International Womens Day
Girls in the juvenile justice system

April
Columbine Anniversary
Reminder that youth violence and crime are on the decline, and schools are among the
safest place to be for our youth.
Easter
Have a minister sermonize on juvenile justice issues

May
Mothers Day
Publicize non-violent youth who cant be with their mothers because they are
incarcerated
Publicize number of mothers who cant be with their kids because the youth are in
detention centers of adult jails.
Graduation Time
Kids in the adult system are graduating to a life without second chances

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

43

June
Beginning of Summer
Events tied to prevention programs
Studies show that crime goes up in the summer when kids dont have meaningful
activities
Fathers Day
Publicize non-violent youth who cant be with their fathers because they are
incarcerated

July
Independence Day
As Americans fire up their grills to celebrate our nations independence, 2,000 kids
locked in detention centers or adult jails have nothing to celebrate.

Other Possible Hooks

These are events you could do anytime of the year, depending on your states calendar, your
goals, and your capacity to do these events.
Annual Release of Kids Count data (e.g. pull out jj portion and release separately)
High Notoriety State and National Crimes
e.g., youth who killed, resulting in a bad state law
Anniversary of Passage of Major Laws
e.g., anniversary of California Prop. 21; passage of SB 179 in Ohio one year later
Hundred year anniversary of your states juvenile court

44

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

REFERENCES
1

Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report.
Page 89. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2 Bishop, D., et al., The Transfer of Juveniles to Criminal Court: Does It Make a
Difference, CRIME & DELINQUENCY, Vol. 42, No. 2, April 1996 171-191; Fagan, J.,
The Comparative Advantage of Juvenile Versus Criminal Court Sanctions on
Recidivism Among Adolescent Felony Offenders, Final Report. Grant 87-IJCX4044 to
the National Institute of Justice.
3 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). Youth Violence: A Report to the
Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for
Mental Health Services; and National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Mental
Health.
4 Males, M. & MacAllair, D. (2000). The Color of Justice. Washington, DC: Building Blocks
for Youth.
5 Poe-Yamagata, E., & Jones, M. (2000). And Justice For Some: Differential Treatment of
Minority Youth in the Justice System. Washington, DC: Building Blocks for Youth.
6 Juszkiewicz, J. (2000). Youth Crime/Adult Time: Is Justice Served? Washington, DC:
Building Blocks for Youth.
7 The focus groups were conducted from September, 1998, to November, 1998.
8 The poll was of 2,003 adults 18 or older living in the United States. It had a margin of
sampling error of +/- 2.2%, and was conducted from January 30 to February 12, 1999.
9 Papers reporting this research are published together as Reframing Youth Issues,
Working Papers of the FrameWorks Institute and the Center for Communications and
Community, UCLA. The research was analyzed in a paper, Reframing Youth Issues for
Public Consideration and Support: A FrameWorks Message Memo by Susan Nall Bales,
which was the source for comments on the FrameWorks research in this advocacy
guide.
10 The question was split half of respondents were asked to consider a Black youth and
half were asked to consider a White youth.
11 In a second question, more than half of respondents strongly agreed that wealthier
juveniles receive better treatment than poor juveniles.

Public Opinion on Youth, Crime and Race : A Guide for Advocates

45

Youth Law Center

1010 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Suite 310
Washington, DC 20005-4902
202 637-0377
www.buildingblocksforyouth.org