Youth re-contact with the Nova Scotia justice system, 2012/2013 to 2014/2015

As young people transition into adulthood, they are often faced with physical, emotional and social challenges which put them at risk for delinquency (McWhirter et al. 2016). Globally and historically, significant efforts have been directed toward addressing youth delinquency, by developing programs and policies which account for the age and cognitive awareness of youth and, subsequently, their moral blameworthiness (Shoemaker 2017; Allen and Superle 2016; Farrington et al. 2012; Davis-Barron 2009; YCJA 2002; Kvaraceus 1964). In Canada, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) provides the legislative framework for a fairer and more effective youth justice system by legislating how young people between the ages of 12 and 17 who come into contact with the justice system are dealt with. The YCJA provides more age-appropriate responses to youth crime, acknowledging that extrajudicial measures which do not involve the formal court system "are often the most appropriate and effective way to address youth crime [and] allow for effective and timely interventions focused on correcting offending behaviour" (YCJA 2002). The YCJA aims to divert youth offenders involved in less serious types of crime with extrajudicial measures and, as a result, reduce "the over-reliance on incarceration for non-violent young persons" with the view that the most serious interventions should be reserved for the most serious crimes.

Following the implementation of the YCJA, there was a notable decline in the charging of youth accused of crime as more youth were dealt with by other means. In addition, the overall rate of youth accused of crime in general has been declining (Allen 2018). Even so, it has been shown that a small proportion of people are responsible for a large share of repeated contacts with the justice system, and that youth are at a higher risk for repeat offending (Brennan and Matarazzo 2016). Additionally, research has found that chronic offending has long-term negative health and social consequences, and can impact an individuals' economic situation, both in terms of their contributions to the general economy, as well as their reliance on government financial support. Moreover, research suggests that most adult offenders and career criminals first came into contact with the justice system as youth (Boyce et al. 2018; Baglivio et al. 2014; Farrington et al. 2012). Therefore, addressing the issue of repeat offending, especially among youth offenders, is not only a crime prevention strategy, but it may also aid in reducing the potential strain placed on the justice, health, economic and social support systems by a relatively small group of people.

As the third in a series of articles published by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics on re-contact with the justice system,^Note  this Juristat article uses data from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey, the Integrated Criminal Courts Survey (ICCS) and, for the first time, restorative justice data provided by the Nova Scotia Department of Justice, to examine youth pathways (see Text box 1) through the Nova Scotia justice system. Restorative justice (RJ) is an approach to justice that focuses on addressing the harm caused by crime while holding the offender responsible for their actions, by providing an opportunity for those directly affected by crime—victims, offenders, and communities—to identify and address their needs in the aftermath of a crime (FPT Working Group on RJ 2018). While there are various approaches to RJ, including mediation, restorative conferencing and healing circles, all RJ methods are built on the same foundation: they are voluntary, involve giving an opportunity to the victim to face their accused and the offender to take responsibility for their actions, and allow the community to be engaged in the justice process (FPT Working Group on RJ 2018; Correctional Service Canada 2012; UNODC 2006; see Text box 2). In Canada, RJ can take place at any point in the justice system, including before or after charges are laid by the police or the Crown, and before or after court sentencing.

Start of text box 1

End of text box 1

About half of youth offenders in Nova Scotia come into contact with police for property crime

In 2012/2013, a total of 2,838 youth between the ages of 12 and 17 came into contact with police in Nova Scotia. These youth represented 16% of persons accused of a criminal offence in Nova Scotia that year. The majority (71%) of youth accused were male.

Consistent with findings for youth in Canada overall (Allen and Superle 2016), nearly half (46%) of youth accused of crime in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 were involved in property offences, a proportion which was slightly higher among female youth offenders than their male counterparts (48% versus 45%) (Table 1).^Note Note  These property offences mainly included theft or shoplifting of $5,000 or less, mischief and breaking and entering. Nearly three in ten (27%) youth accused committed violent offences (29% of females and 26% of males), while about one in eight youth were involved in drug-related offences or other types of offences (13% each). Both drug-related and other violations were slightly more common among male youth accused than their female counterparts (14% versus 11%, and 14% versus 12%, respectively).

In comparison, 26% of adults in Nova Scotia that year were accused of property-related offences. While youth were almost twice as likely as adults to be involved in property offences and slightly more likely to be involved in drug offences, violent offences and other types of offences were more common among adult offenders than youth offenders.

Older youth offenders in Nova Scotia account for more police-reported crime

Research has shown that the rate of youth accused of crime in Canada increases with age and peaks at age 17 (Allen and Superle 2016). Similarly, the proportion of youth accused of crime in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 also increased with age with the largest proportion of accused youth being 17 (28%) followed by 16 (24%).^Note  The median age of youth accused of crime in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 was 16.

Of note, Allen and Superle (2016) showed that changes in the age demographics of offenders differ by type of offence. Correspondingly, contact with Nova Scotia police for youth aged 12 to 15 were most commonly in relation to property (52%) and violent offences (30%). This was also the case for those who were aged 16 or 17, though the proportions were somewhat lower (41% and 24%, respectively) (Chart 1). In contrast, about one in five (19%) youth who were aged 16 or 17 were accused of drug-related offences, which compared to 8% for youth aged 15 or younger.^Note 

Majority of accused youth are not charged

Since the enactment of the YCJA in 2003, the rate of youth diverted from the formal justice system through extrajudicial measures like community programs has remained consistently higher than the rate of youth formally charged (Keighley 2017). Accordingly, one in four (24%) youth who first came into contact with Nova Scotia police in 2012/2013 was charged or recommended for charge by police. To place this number in context, just over half (53%) of adults accused in Nova Scotia that year were charged or recommended for charge by police. Instead, about one in three (32%) youth received verbal warning, while 9% were diverted from the official system into alternative programs,^Note  and for 6% of youth, a caution was issued—this includes police-written cautions addressed to the youth and/or their parents, or a meeting between the police, youth and other parties including parents or social workers. Many youth (29%) were dealt with through other means including situations where charges were not laid because of departmental discretion or at the request of the complainant.

While the clearance status of individuals accused of an offence may be dependent on various factors outside the scope of this study, for example prior involvement with the justice system (see Text box 3), the current analysis found that the way in which youth accused of crime were dealt with largely depended on two main factors which are within scope: the type of crime committed and the age of the accused. For example, warnings and referrals to alternative programs were more common among youth accused of property offences, while charges were more often laid against youth accused of violent or other offences (Chart 2). Additionally, the proportion of youth charged increased with age, as younger youth often received some type of warning.

Despite male and female youth offenders having a similar age profile, decisions made by police differed by the sex of the accused. Overall, male youth were slightly more likely than female youth to be charged for the initial contact in 2012/2013 (26% versus 20%), while females were slightly more likely to receive verbal warnings or referrals to extrajudicial sanctions. These differences may in part be attributable to the type of offence reported. For example, Nova Scotia youth accused of shoplifting were significantly less likely to have been charged compared to youth accused of all other offences (5% versus 26%), and shoplifting has been found to be significantly more common among female youth accused (18%) than male youth accused (6%).

The majority of accused youth end their first pathway with the police

Coming into contact with the police can lead an accused person along different justice system pathways (see Text box 1). For the majority (71%) of the over 2,800 youth who came into contact with Nova Scotia police in 2012/2013, the pathway for that initial offence ended with the police (Chart 3), while this was the case for just over half (52%) of adults accused that year.^Note  In addition to coming into contact with the police, more than one in seven (15%) youth accused with an offence in 2012/2013 also came into contact with the court system (but not restorative justice) for the initial offence, and more than one in ten (11%) had contact with restorative justice (with no court contact). A small proportion (3%) of youth offenders had a pathway which brought them into contact with all parts of the justice system included in the study—with police, restorative justice and the court system.^Note 

Start of text box 2

End of text box 2

Crime severity highest among youth with court pathways

In Canada, the severity of police-reported crime is measured by the Crime Severity Index (CSI). The youth CSI takes into account the volume of crime involving youth (charged and not charged) and the relative severity of the crimes they commit. The severity (or seriousness) of each offence is the weight assigned to that offence. Offence weights are determined by the incarceration rate and average length of incarceration based on actual sentences handed down by Canadian criminal courts (Wallace et al. 2009; Babyak et al. 2009).

Generally, an individual's pathway through the justice system was largely a reflection of the type of crime they committed (see Text box 3). For example, youth who committed violent offences were more likely to be charged than youth accused of property or drug offences. Consequently, these individuals were also more likely to come into contact with other parts of the justice system. In terms of severity, the average CSI weight for the initial offence was particularly high among youth with court pathways. Youth who went to court (no restorative justice) had an average CSI weight of 113 compared to 46 for youth who only came into contact with police, 59 for youth who came into contact with restorative justice (no court contact), and 106 for those who came into contact with all three parts of the justice system. Overall, the average CSI weight for offences committed by youth in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 was 60.^Note 

Half of youth offenders in Nova Scotia had a re-contact with the police

Previous research has found that a small group of chronic offenders are disproportionally responsible for a large share of crime (Brennan and Matarazzo 2016; Carrington 2007; Carrington et al. 2005). Analysis from the current study support these findings. During the study period, the 2,838 youth accused of an offence in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 had a total of 8,117 contacts with Nova Scotia police.^Note  More precisely, 1,425 youth, or 50% of accused youth had at least one re-contact with Nova Scotia police during the study period.

Chronic youth offenders responsible for almost half of all youth contacts

Overall, chronic offenders—those who had five or more re-contacts during the study period—represented 12% of the offending youth population. Chronic youth offenders (349 youth) had a median of nine contacts with Nova Scotia police during the study period. When it comes to repeat offenders, one in five (20%) youth offenders who came into contact with the justice system in 2012/2013 had one subsequent contact within the two-year period, and nearly as many (18%) had between two and four re-contacts.^Note  In total, chronic offenders were responsible for 45% of the youth contacts with Nova Scotia police during the period of the study, and repeat offenders were responsible for 37% of all the youth contacts (Chart 4).

In comparison with youth offenders, a smaller proportion (41%) of adult offenders in Nova Scotia had a re-contact with police during the study period. The difference between adults and youth was especially notable for chronic offenders, in particular male youth. More specifically, chronic offending was twice as common among male youth offenders as among male adult offenders (14% versus 7%). The proportions of female chronic offenders was also higher for youth than adults, but to a slightly lesser degree (8% versus 6%).

Start of text box 3

End of text box 3

Chronic offending most prevalent among youth with court pathways

Youth who had come into contact with the court system for their first pathway of the study were more likely to have had a re-contact with the police within the two-year period. Re-contact with police for a new offence was least common among youth whose last known contact with the justice system for the initial contact was the police.^Note  More specifically, a large majority (77%) of youth offenders who came into contact with the court system (no restorative justice) had a re-contact within the two-year period, compared to less than half of the youth whose pathway for the initial contact ended with the police (45%) or with restorative justice (no courts) (46%) (Table 2; Diagram 1).

Chronic offending was particularly common among youth with court pathways, with 31% of youth who came into contact with the court system (with no restorative justice contact) for their 2012/2013 initial contact having had at least five more re-contacts during the study period. This compared to 9% of offenders who came into contact with only the police for their initial contact in 2012/2013, and 6% of those who came into contact with restorative justice (no court). Of the 89 youth who came into contact with all three aspects of the justice system (police, court and restorative justice), just over half (55%) had a re-contact with the police. More than one in seven (15%) youth who came into contact with all parts of the justice system were chronic offenders.

Differences by pathways were likely driven by the type and severity of the crime committed as well as other factors not available for this study (see Text box 3). Overall, re-contact was more common among youth who were accused of more serious offences. The average CSI weight for the initial contact among youth who had a re-contact was 63 (64 for repeat and 61 for chronic offenders) compared to 56 among one-time offenders. For example, 14% of youth accused of a violent crime in 2012/2013 were chronic offenders—slightly higher than when compared to 12% among those accused of a property-related offence. Youth who committed a violent offence were more likely to have come into contact with the court system. On the other hand, chronic offending was least common (5%) among youth who had an initial drug-related offence in 2012/2013. These youth were also least likely to have come into contact with the court system, in general.

It is important to note that, while a contact with Nova Scotia police in 2012/2013 is considered the initial point of contact, history of re-contact among offenders prior to this date is outside the scope of this study. Therefore, although this study examines the prevalence and frequency of re-contact by the various pathways, it is not known whether the cycle of re-offending had already begun for some youth. It is therefore possible that police and court decisions, and subsequently, pathways within the study period may have been impacted by an offender's history (see Text box 3).

Start of text box 4

End of text box 4

Male offenders in Nova Scotia quicker to return to the justice system

Similar to Brennan and Matarazzo's findings (2016), many youth offenders in Nova Scotia returned to the justice system within three months of their initial contact. More precisely, 20% had a re-contact within three months of their initial contact with police in 2012/2013 (Table 3).^Note  This compared to 16% among adult offenders in Nova Scotia. Among both youth and adults, male offenders were more likely to have a re-contact within three months. Male youth offenders were nearly twice as likely as female youth offenders to have a re-contact within three months of their initial contact (23% versus 13%). A smaller gap was noted between adult male and female offenders (17% versus 13%).

Youth with court pathways quickest to have a re-contact

Youth whose justice system pathways for the initial contact had led them to court (no restorative justice) were most likely to have a re-contact within three months (40%) (Chart 5). This was likely reflective of the length of time to re-contact among chronic offenders who were overrepresented within this pathway. Overall, within three months of the 2012/2013 initial contact, the large majority (70%) of chronic offenders had committed a second offence, compared to 29% of repeat offenders.

In comparison, 11% of youth offenders who came into contact with restorative justice (without going to court) returned to the justice system within three months. Of the small group of youth who came into contact with all three levels of the justice system, close to three in ten (28%) had a re-contact within three months of the initial contact. At the sixth-month mark, over half (51%) of the youth who had come into contact with the court system had a re-contact—more than twice the proportion of those who had only come into contact with the police (24%) or police and RJ (18%).

Crime severity remains virtually unchanged between first and second contact

Similar to findings for adult offenders who had multiple contacts with the justice system, 40% of youth who had a re-contact were accused of an offence less severe for the second contact (first re-contact), nearly as many (41%) were involved in a more severe crime, and 19% committed a crime of the same level of severity. Despite repeat and chronic offenders having an average CSI weight of 64 and 61, respectively, for the initial offence in 2012/2013, the average CSI weight for the second offence among repeat offenders remained at 64, but for chronic offenders it increased to 69. On average, the CSI weight for the second offence among youth who had a re-contact increased slightly to 66 from 63 for the initial offence in 2012/2013. Property-related offences remained the most commonly reported type of first re-contact offence.

Summary

The current study analyzed pathways of youth offenders through the Nova Scotia justice system in order to examine the nature and extent of repeat offending among those who come into contact with police at a young age. Using a cohort of youth who came into contact with Nova Scotia police between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2013, this study found that, over a two-year period, these 2,838 youth accused were responsible for 8,117 contacts with Nova Scotia police. Overall, chronic offenders—those with five or more re-contacts—represented 12% of the offending youth population, but they accounted for almost half (45%) of youth contacts with Nova Scotia police which were reported over the two-year period.

The current study found that most youth offenders first came into contact with the justice system in 2012/2013 for relatively minor offences such as theft of $5,000 or under and mischief. In line with the provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act on dealing with youth according to their age and moral blameworthiness, the majority of youth offenders ended their pathways for the initial offence with the police (71%), while a small proportion (3%) came into contact with all three parts of the justice system—that is, police, courts and restorative justice.

A young offender's pathway through the justice system appeared to be linked to the severity of their initial offence in 2012/2013, and subsequently their re-contact behavior. In this study, youth who had come into contact with the court system (no restorative justice) in relation to their initial 2012/2013 offence were more likely to have been involved in more serious crime. Within the two-year period, these youth were most likely to have had a re-contact with police, and to chronically re-offend during this time (31%), while those who had come into contact with restorative justice programs (no court contact) for the initial offence were least likely to chronically re-offend (6%). While the seriousness or severity of the second offence remained similar among those who had a re-contact during the study period, the severity of the second offence among chronic offenders increased, while among repeat offenders, the average severity of the second crime remained the same.

Detailed data tables

Table 1 Youth and adults accused, by type of first offence in 2012/2013, Nova Scotia

Table 2 Youth re-contact with Nova Scotia police, by frequency of re-contacts and pathway, 2012/2013 to 2014/2015

Table 3 Elapsed time between first and second contact with Nova Scotia police among youth and adults accused, by sex, 2012/2013 to 2014/2015

Survey description

Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting

The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey was developed in 1962 with the cooperation and assistance of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. The UCR Survey data reflect reported crime that has been substantiated through a police investigation. The data come from all federal, provincial and municipal police services in Canada and involve offences under the Criminal Code and other federal statutes.

One incident can involve multiple offences. To ensure the comparability of the data between police services, the counts presented in this article are based on the most serious violation in the incident, determined based on a standardized classification rule used by all police services, generally according to the maximum penalty for the offence.

Integrated Criminal Courts Survey

The Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS) is administered by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (Statistics Canada) in collaboration with provincial and territorial departments responsible for criminal courts in Canada. The survey collects statistical information on adult and youth court cases involving Criminal Code and other federal statute offences.

The primary unit of analysis is a case. A case is defined as one or more charges against an accused person or company that were processed by the courts at the same time and received a final decision. A case combines all charges against the same person having one or more key overlapping dates (date of offence, date of initiation, date of first appearance, date of decision, or date of sentencing) into a single case.

A case that has more than one charge is represented by the charge with the "most serious offence" (MSO). The most serious offence is selected using the following rules. First, court decisions are considered and the charge with the "most serious decision" (MSD) is selected. Court decisions for each charge in a case are ranked from most to least serious as follows: 1) guilty, 2) guilty of a lesser offence, 3) acquitted, 4) stay of proceeding, 5) withdrawn, dismissed and discharged, 6) not criminally responsible, 7) other, and 8) transfer of court jurisdiction. Second, in cases where two or more charges result in the same MSD (for example, guilty), Criminal Code sanctions are considered. The charge with the most serious offence type is selected according to an offence seriousness scale, based on actual sentences handed down by courts in Canada.

Nova Scotia's Restorative Justice Information System

The Nova Scotia department of justice has provided the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (Statistics Canada) with data pertaining to restorative justice, for the first time. This data was captured in Nova Scotia's Restorative Justice Information System (NSRJI). Information such as offender ID, age, case acceptance date, referring body and agreement information were provided to Statistics Canada to allow for a data linkage project that establishes baseline information about individuals who had contact with the Nova Scotia justice system.

Re-contact and pathways data

For this study, data from three different sources were used: the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey, the Integrated Criminal Courts Survey (ICCS) and special data extracts from the Nova Scotia Restorative Justice Information System (NSRJI).

The study established the number of people who came into contact with the justice system in Nova Scotia in 2012/2013 and had a re-contact, by examining records of all founded incidents reported by Nova Scotia police services to the UCR survey from 2012/2013 to 2014/2015. The pathways of individuals through the system were established by linking police-reported UCR records to data collected through the ICCS and NSRJI.

References

Allen, M. 2018. "Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2017." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Allen, M. and Superle, T. 2016. "Youth crime in Canada, 2014." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Babyak, C., Alavi, A., Collins, K., Halladay, A. and Tapper, D. 2009. The Methodology of the Police-Reported Crime Severity Index. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. HSMD-2009-006.

Baglivio, T., Jackowski, K., Greenwald, M.A. and Howell, J.C. 2014. "Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: A statewide analysis of prevalence and prediction of subsequent recidivism using risk and protective factors." Criminology & Public Policy. Vol. 13, no. 1. p. 83-116.

Bergseth, K. J., and Bouffard, J.A. 2007. "The long-term impact of restorative justice programming for juvenile offenders." Journal of Criminal Justice. Vol. 35, no. 4. p. 433-451.

Boyce, J., Te, S., and Brennan, S. 2018. "Economic profiles of offenders in Saskatchewan." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Brennan, S. and Matarazzo, A. 2016. "Re-contact with the Saskatchewan justice system." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Burczycka, M. and Munch, C. 2015. "Trends in offences against the administration of justice." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Carrington, P. 2007. "The development of police-reported delinquency among Canadian youth born in 1987 and 1990." Crime and Justice Research Paper Series. No. 9. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-561-M.

Carrington, P. J. and Schulenberg, J. L. 2003. Police Discretion with Young Offenders. Department of Justice Canada. Ottawa. (accessed on December 19, 2018).

Carrington, P., Matarazzo, A. and deSouza, P. 2005. "Court careers of a Canadian birth cohort." Crime and Justice Research Paper Series. No. 6. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-561-M.

Correctional Services Canada. 2012. "Restorative justice." Fact Sheet. (accessed on July 20, 2018).

Davis-Barron, S. 2009. Canadian Youth & the Criminal Law: One Hundred Years of Youth Justice Legislation in Canada. LexisNexis.

Department of Justice. 2007. "Restorative justice program protocol." Nova Scotia Justice.

Farrington, D., Loeber, R. and Howell, J. 2012. "Young adult offenders: The need for more effective legislative options and justice processing." Criminology & Public Policy. Vol. 11, no. 4.

Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Restorative Justice (FPT Working Group on RJ). 2018. Principles and Guidelines for Restorative Justice Practice in Criminal Matters.

Keighley, K. 2017. "Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2016." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Kvaraceus W. C. 1964. Juvenile Delinquency. A Problem for the Modern World. UNESCO. Catalogue no. MC.63/D.55/A.

Latimer, J., Dowden, C. and Muise, D. 2001. "The effectiveness of restorative justice practices: A meta-analysis." Research and Statistics Division Methodological Series. Department of Justice Canada.

Luke, G., and Lind, B. 2002. "Reducing juvenile crime: Conferencing versus court." Crime and Justice Bulletin No. 69. NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Malakieh, J. 2018. "Adult and youth correctional statistics in Canada, 2016/2017." Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

McWhirter, J., Jeffries, B. T., McWhirter, E., McWhirter, H., McWhirter A. C. and McWhirter, R. 2016. At Risk Youth. Nelson Education.

Shoemaker, D. J. 2017. Juvenile Delinquency. Rowman & Littlefield.

Tomporowski, B. 2014. "Restorative justice and community justice in Canada." Restorative Justice. Vol. 2, no. 2. p. 218-224.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). 2006. "Handbook on restorative justice programmes." Criminal Justice Handbook Series. Sales No. E.06.V.15. United Nations, New York.

Wallace, M., Turner, J., Matarazzo, A. and Babyak, C. 2009. Measuring Crime in Canada: Introducing the Crime Severity Index and Improvements to the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-004-X.

Youth Criminal Justice Act. (YCJA). S.C. 2002, c. 1.