Logo image
Assessing the "evolving standards of decency": public opinion of non-capital sentencing options for juvenile offenders
Dissertation   Open access

Assessing the "evolving standards of decency": public opinion of non-capital sentencing options for juvenile offenders

Tracy L. Fass
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), Drexel University
Aug 2007
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17918/etd-2712
pdf
Fass_Tracy_2007676.70 kBDownloadView

Abstract

Juvenile delinquents Life imprisonment Clinical Psychology
Recent judicial decisions and statutory changes have resulted in an absolute ban on capital punishment for convicted juvenile offenders. This study examines public opinion of alternative sentencing options: life without parole, life with parole, and blended sentencing. The current study is the first to assess public opinion of life without parole outside the context of public opinion of capital punishment for juveniles. A total of 359 participants (189 undergraduate students and 170 law students) were administered a vignette describing the commission and conviction of a serious crime. The participants were asked to rate how likely they would be to sentence the defendant to each of the three sentence options. Results provided partial support for the hypotheses that defendant age, culpability, and offense severity are positively related to sentence severity, and participants' level of education is negatively related to sentence severity. Overall, results indicate that participants preferred a blended sentence most, life with parole second, and life without parole least. It appears that both the general public and the legal community support the use of the juvenile justice system as a first step in punishing a defendant, and neither group supports the trend toward more punitive treatment of juvenile offenders.

Metrics

34 File views/ downloads
68 Record Views

Details

Logo image