Weapon and drug offenses and juvenile disproportionate minority contact: an impact assessment and practical discussion

The Causes and Pervasiveness of DMC: Stakeholder Perceptions of Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice System

“…The police officers interviewed suggested that minority youth may attempt to "establish or increase their social status" by having their weapons visible (p. 121). This behavior may display differential behavior but falls short of actual differential criminal offending (Sullivan et al, 2016). The study stated " .…”

“…Extant DMC literature is mostly a mixed bag of quantitative studies examining why disproportionality exists at the different stages of the juvenile justice process. While not always clearly identified, DMC studies tend to focus on the impact race has on the decisions of juvenile justice system actors (see Sullivan, Mueller, Gann, Spiegel, & McManus, 2016). This type of empirical DMC research and closely related literature is relatively abundant and is helpful for acknowledging the existence of racial disparities and the need for systems change; however, several authors have called for expanding DMC-specific literature to include more qualitative approaches (see Peck, 2016).…”

“…It should be noted that in its definitions, OJJDP recognizes the interrelated nature of the DMC contributing mechanisms. Sullivan, Mueller, Gann, Spiegel, and McManus (2016) intentionally studied the differential offending hypotheses by examining how justice practitioners, including court personnel and police officers, understand weapon-and drug-related offenses, and how it impacts their decision-making process (Sullivan et al, 2016). Differential offending refers to the belief that DMC exists because minority youth disproportionately participate in delinquent behaviors.…”

“…Differential offending refers to the belief that DMC exists because minority youth disproportionately participate in delinquent behaviors. In their interviews with court personnel, Sullivan et al (2016) found evidence that existing policy operated with a presumption that juveniles with weapon-and drug-related charges are uniquely dangerous. At least some of the court personnel appeared to adhere to the differential offending hypothesis expressing that minority youth are more likely to commit offenses that are serious, violent, and involving firearms or other weapons.…”

“…2-5). In addition to court officials who cited the cooccurrence of offending and poverty, the officers in the Sullivan et al (2016) study felt that poor youth were more likely to be processed further into the system due to a lack of "financial resources and social connections" (p. 121) illustrating a belief in indirect effects as a contributor to DMC. Kakar's (2006) study revealed some information related to indirect effects but also connected causes of DMC to how juveniles are processed differently.…”