NCJ Number
131584
Date Published
1991
Length
17 pages
Annotation
This analysis of juvenile justice in Australia questions the benefits of traditional methods of paying attorneys and of attorneys' extensive use of pleas of not guilty in the Children's Court; it concludes that such pleas are also used excessively in North America as well.
Abstract
When attorneys are paid for the time they spend in court, they are more likely to use a vigorous defense and encourage the juvenile to plead not guilty. These strenuous efforts create delays that may not benefit the juvenile. Although they may convince juveniles that the lawyer is fighting for them, they may not impress the magistrate. Therefore, a less adversarial style of defense focusing on sentencing and guilt may better serve the long-term interests of juveniles. This would shift the balance of time consumed by the attorney from court time to time spent in contacting in other agencies and developing recommendations for sentencing. The result would be more guilty pleas that incorporate carefully prepared options for magistrates to consider. In addition, using salaried attorneys or public defenders might better serve both juveniles and the public in Australia, Canada, and the United States. Case examples, 13 references, and list of other discussion papers