A recent series of highly publicized campus sexual assaults and the questionable responses by the academic institutions where they occurred has led some policymakers and academic administrators to call for legislative and institutional change. For such changes to be effective, academic administrators and legislators need solutions that effectively protect victims, punish perpetrators, and encourage institutional compliance with relevant legislation. Furthermore, there has been significant debate about how much the criminal justice system can and should be involved when sexual assaults occur on college campuses. To address these questions, there needs to be a more thorough understanding of existing state sexual assault laws and their capacity to handle sexual assaults that occur on college campuses. This project identified and systematically examined all U.S. state statutes relating to sexual assault to evaluate to what extent these laws are appropriate and accessible for victims of campus sexual assault. Results revealed that all 50 states have at least 1 criminal statute addressing sexual assault, with a total of 432 statutory subsections being identified for inclusion. Across statutes, key concepts relating to consent and incapacity were often ill defined or undefined, and many of the statutes appear to be poorly suited to handling campus sexual assaults. These findings have implications for the adjudication of campus sexual assaults, and such results can potentially be used to amend existing legislation and inform future legislation.

No abstract

Behavioral health needs in justice-involved adolescents are an increasing concern, as it has been estimated that two-thirds of youths in the juvenile justice system now meet the criteria for one or more psychological disorders. This article describes the application of the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM), developed to describe five "points of interception" from standard prosecution into rehabilitation-oriented alternatives for adults (Munetz & Griffin, 2006), to juvenile justice. The five SIM intercepts are: (1) first contact with law enforcement or emergency services; (2) initial hearings and detention following arrest; (3) jails and courts (including problem-solving courts); (4) re-entry from jails, prisons and forensic hospitals; and (5) community corrections and community support, including probation and parole. Modifying the SIM for application with justice-involved adolescents, this article describes three examples of interventions at different intercepts: Intercept 1 (the Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program), Intercept 3 (problem-solving courts for juveniles), and Intercept 5 (juvenile probation). Relevant research evidence for each example is reviewed, and the further application of this model to juveniles is described. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Using the social clown anemonefish Amphiprion ocellaris, whether individuals exhibited consistency in activity levels, boldness and sociability in a paired context, and whether these three behavioural traits were positively correlated within a single behavioural syndrome, was investigated. The results highlight that consistent individual differences in behaviour are expressed in a social fish and suggest that consistent behavioural traits and behavioural syndromes could influence the structure and functioning of their societies.

Individuals with behavioral health disorders are significantly overrepresented in the criminal justice system. The incarceration of offenders with substance use disorders and mental illness has contributed to dramatic growth in the incarcerated population in the United States. Problem-solving courts provide judicially supervised treatment for behavioral health needs commonly found among offenders, including substance abuse and mental health, and they treat a variety of offender populations. By addressing the problems that underlie criminal behavior, problem-solving courts seek to decrease the “revolving door” that results when offender needs are not addressed. Problem-solving courts use a team approach among the judge, defense attorney, prosecutor, and treatment providers, which is a paradigm shift in how the justice system treats offenders with special needs. Offenders in problem-solving courts are held accountable for their behavior while being provided with judicially supervised treatment designed to reduce the risk of reoffending. Despite the proliferation of problem-solving courts, there are unanswered questions about how they function, how effective they are, and the most promising ways to implement problem-solving justice. Problem-Solving Courts and the Criminal Justice System is the first book to focus broadly on problem-solving courts. The changing landscape of the criminal justice system, recent development of problem-solving courts, and ongoing shift toward offender rehabilitation underscore the need for this book. This book provides those in the fields of mental health, criminal justice, law, and related fields with a comprehensive foundation of information related to the role of problem-solving courts in reforming the criminal justice system. This book also provides researchers, academics, administrators, and policy-makers with an overview of the existing research on problem-solving courts, including the challenges faced by researchers when examining these courts.