Juvenile Crime in Washington, D.C

JUVENILE CRIME IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

ublic officials in Washington, D.C. are debating new juvenile justice policies. A number of high-profile crimes in 2003 prompted city leaders to reconsider the District of Columbia’s approach to dealing with youth violence. In early October of 2003, a Washington bus driver was hit by a stray bullet during a daylight gun battle between rival youth gangs on a busy street in a residential area. Later that month, a 16-year-old bystander pwas shot fatally as he was leaving a high school dance. The 15-year-old shooter was aiming at members of a rival gang or “crew.”

After nearly a decade of falling crime rates, violent crimes such as these have prompted widespread fears that Washington may be witnessing a new epidemic of murder by young people. Violence—especially gun violence—alarms the public and stirs city officials to act. But do these recent tragedies really represent a significant new trend, and how should the DECEMBER 2003 city respond?

JEFFREY A. BUTTS So far, the ideas being advanced by Washington leaders represent relatively meager changes in the legal process that are unlikely to have a broad or lasting effect on crime and violence. Rather than focusing their efforts on preventing serious crime and improving the safety of D.C. neigh- borhoods, elected officials are proposing new legal penalties for violent juveniles. In particular, they want to make it easier to move juvenile offenders into the criminal (adult) justice system for trial and punishment.1

A member of the D.C. city council recently introduced a bill to lower the age at which juvenile offenders charged with serious crimes may be tried as adults from 16 to 15. Another bill would shift the burden of proof to defendants in cases involving the potential transfer of a juvenile to adult court. Accused juveniles would have to prove that adult trials are not needed, instead of the government being required to prove that they are needed.

Why are Washington officials focusing on policies to increase the use of adult court for juvenile offenders? The number of youth likely to be affected by these changes is relatively small, perhaps a few dozen per year. Furthermore, research on criminal court transfer suggests that while such policies may be popular with the public they will have very little effect on overall public safety and may even increase the odds that youth will commit serious crimes in the future.2

While states such as Maryland and Missouri are expanding their use of crime prevention programs, increasing opportunities for youth, and working harder to rehabilitate young URBAN offenders, policymakers in Washington, D.C. are calling for an expansion of adult-style INSTITUTE punishment for violent juveniles. The proposals being debated in Washington suggest that JUSTICE POLICY CENTER the city is being overwhelmed with violent juvenile crime and that new circumstances demand

new solutions, especially new ways of handling seriously vio- MAKING SENSE OF THE NUMBERS lent youth. They suggest that the adult justice system is better What do these juvenile arrest statistics mean? How can equipped to protect public safety than is the juvenile justice arrest rates be translated into something more meaningful? system. Is Washington, D.C. experiencing a significant increase in Think of a large high school with 1,000 students. Recent juvenile violence? Is juvenile violence increasing more than crime statistics from Washington, D.C. suggest that 7 adult violence? If the adult justice system is the answer to students from that school would have been arrested for Washington’s violent crime problem, does this mean that a serious violent offense in 2003. violent crime by adults has been going down? This policy brief examines these issues by reviewing the latest data on This rate is up slightly from 2002, when only 5 students in crime and violence in the City of Washington and the nation. every 1,000 would have been arrested for a violent crime.

In 1995, however, a high school with 1,000 students JUVENILE CRIME FELL NATIONWIDE FROM would have expected 15 students to be arrested for 1994 TO 2002 serious violence. Juvenile crime in the United States fell dramatically in recent years. Serious and violent juvenile crime plummeted nation- In a high school with 1,000 students, how many pupils would likely be arrested for a serious, violent crime in wide to levels not seen in a generation. In 2002, there were Washington, D.C.? approximately 92,000 arrests of juveniles charged with one of

Year Arrests per 1,000 the four most serious violent crimes (murder, rape, aggravated 3 1995 15 assault, and robbery). Just eight years earlier in 1994, police 2000 7 across the country reported more than 150,000 juvenile arrests 2002 5 for these offenses. On a per capita basis, the rate of violent 2003 7 crime arrests (282 per 100,000 juveniles) was lower in 2002 than at any time since 1973. Source: Annual Arrest Statistics, Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C. The national rate of juvenile murder arrests was 65 percent lower in 2002 than in 1990. Even compared with 1980, murder arrests in 2002 were down more than 30 percent. Other serious offenses by juveniles showed similar declines. Compared Research on criminal court transfer suggests with 1990, the per capita arrest rate for robbery was down that while such policies may be popular with 50 percent, aggravated assault dropped 20 percent, burglary the public, they will have very little effect slipped by 49 percent, and the juvenile arrest rate for auto on overall public safety and may even increase theft plunged 59 percent between 1990 and 2002. the odds that youth will commit serious crimes in the future.

JUVENILE ARRESTS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. Recent incidents of youth violence in the city do WERE UP SLIGHTLY IN 2003 not yet represent a significant trend, and violence The Urban Institute recently obtained data about juvenile by adults is still far more pervasive and more arrests in Washington, D.C. from the city’s Metropolitan deadly. Police Department (MPD). Data from January through October of 2003 were adjusted to represent a full year so they could be compared with arrest data from 1995 through 2002.4 Unless the monthly volume of juvenile arrests in November and December of 2003 turns out to be sharply different from arrests in January through October, the analysis that follows provides a good estimate of juvenile crime trends through 2003.

Juvenile crime trends in Washington are similar to those seen across the country. Juvenile violence in 2003 is significantly lower than a decade ago. The number of juvenile arrests for violent crime dropped 52 percent between 1995 and 2003, from 641 to 307 (table 1). While violent crime arrests grew somewhat between 2002 and 2003, the level of violent juvenile crime in 2003 is still low relative to 1995.

TABLE 1. JUVENILE ARRESTS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

Number of Arrests Percent Change 1995 2002 2003a 1995–2002 1995–2003

Violent Offenses 641 245 307 –62% –52% Murder 13 1 1 –92 –92 Rape 7 2 4 –71 –43 Robbery 300 103 132 –66 –56 Aggravated Assault 320 139 170 –57 –47

Other Offenses Burglary 74 36 36 –51% –51% Larceny 76 55 56 –28 –26 Auto Theft 769 555 662 –28 –14 Other Assaults 262 278 293 6 12 Weapons 253 77 99 –70 –61 Drug Offenses 652 357 341 –45 –48

All Offenses 4,195 2,422 2,599 –42% –38%

a 2003 figures are weighted estimates, using data from January through October of 2003. Source: Monthly Arrest Statistics, Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C.

Non-violent offenses were also down in general. Juvenile JUVENILE COURT CASES IN WASHINGTON, D.C. arrests for burglary fell 51 percent between 1995 and 2003. DECLINED THROUGH 2002 Larceny was down 26 percent, auto theft was 14 percent lower, The falling juvenile crime rate in D.C. can be seen clearly in weapons offenses declined by 61 percent, and juvenile drug the declining number of young offenders being referred to arrests were 48 percent lower. The only major category of juvenile court to be tried on delinquency charges. Juvenile juvenile crime that grew overall between 1995 and 2003 was court referrals dropped markedly in recent years. Between non-aggravated assault. Arrests for minor assaults without 1990 and 2002, the total number of law violations referred for serious injury climbed 12 percent between 1995 and 2003. trial in D.C. juvenile court fell 52 percent, from 4,713 to 2,241 (table 2). Even when the numbers of juvenile arrests are adjusted for population size, the dominant trend in juvenile crime in the Juvenile court referrals were down for all major offense cate- District of Columbia between 1995 and 2003 has been down- gories during the past decade. Referrals for property offenses ward (figure 1). For example, the per capita rate of juvenile fell from 1,956 to 742 between 1988 and 2002. Referrals for arrests for violent crime dropped from 147 to 66 arrests per person offenses peaked at more than 1,300 in 1994, and then 10,000 youth between 1995 and 2003. In all categories of began to decline, reaching a low of 664 in 2002. Most of the violent crime, the juvenile arrest rate was significantly lower drop in juvenile delinquency was due to the stunning decline in 2003 than in 1995, although for several offenses (e.g., in the number of male juveniles referred to court (figure 2). robbery and aggravated assault) the juvenile arrest rate grew Between 1988 and 2002, juvenile court referrals for male law slightly between 2002 and 2003. violators plunged 64 percent, from 4,976 to 1,815.

TABLE 2. JUVENILE DELINQUENCY CASES IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

Number of Referrals Percent Change 1990 2000 2002 1990–2000 1990–2002

Reasons for Referral Acts against Persons 1,039 676 664 –35% –36% Acts against Property 1,549 766 742 –51 –52 Public Order Offenses 1,870 940 696 –50 –63 Other 255 113 139 –56 –45

All Offenses 4,713 2,495 2,241 –47% –52%

Source: Annual Report of the D.C. Courts, 1982 to 2002. Washington, D.C.

Even when the numbers of juvenile arrests are adjusted for population size, the dominant trend in juvenile crime in the District of Columbia between 1995 and 2003 has been downward.

FIGURE 1. Juvenile Arrest Rates in Washington, D.C.: 1995–2003

Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 1,000 70 900 60 800 700 50 WEAPON OFFENSES 600 40 500 400 ALL OFFENSES 30 300 20 200 100 10 0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 160 80 140 70 120 60 VIOLENT CRIME INDEX OFFENSES* 100 50 80 40 60 30 OTHER, NON-AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS 40 20 20 10 *Murder, Forcible Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault 0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 3.0 250

2.5 200 2.0 AUTO THEFT 150 1.5 MURDER 100 1.0

0.5 50

0.0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 80 180 70 160 60 140 120 50 ROBBERY 100 40 80 30 60 DRUG OFFENSES 20 40 10 20 0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 Juvenile Arrests per 10,000 Youth Ages 10 –17 80 70 70 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 AGGRAVATED ASSAULT MISCELLANEOUS PROPERTY OFFENSES* 20 20 10 10 *Burglary, Larceny, Forgery, Fraud, Stolen Property, Vandalism 0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Sources: Arrest data are from the Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C. Population data are from the National Center for Health Statistics "Bridge Files" prepared from the U.S. Census, 1990 and 2000.

JUVENILE AND ADULT CRIME TRENDS ARE SIMILAR FIGURE 2. Juvenile Delinquency Cases in Washington, D.C. Violent crime in Washington, D.C. is overwhelmingly an adult Delinquency Cases Referred for Juvenile Court Disposition problem. In July and August of 2003, police in Washington 6,000 reported making 503 arrests for violent crimes, including 5,000 murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault (table 3). Of 4,000 these, 462 arrests (or 92 percent) involved adult offenders over 3,000 JUVENILE DELINQUENCY REFERRALS the age of 18. Among the 24 arrests for murder during that 2,000 period, 23 (96 percent) were adults. Just one murder arrest 1,000 involved a juvenile offender. 0 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 The pattern of serious juvenile crime in the District has Delinquency Cases Referred for Juvenile Court Disposition generally followed adult crime trends, but on a much smaller 5,000 4,500 scale. Serious crimes by offenders of all ages (both juvenile 4,000 and adult) grew significantly in Washington during the late 3,500 3,000 MALES 1980s and early 1990s and then fell sharply during the mid- 2,500 2,000 to late 1990s (figure 3). 1,500 1,000 FEMALES 500 Between 1970 and 2002, the number of reported crimes 0 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 involving one of the FBI’s index offenses fluctuated consider- ably. By 2000, the number of index crimes reported in the Delinquency Cases Referred for Juvenile Court Disposition District of Columbia (41,626) was lower than it had been at 3,000 ACTS AGAINST PROPERTY any time since 1970. The previous low points were in 1976 2,500 and 1977 when the number of index crimes dipped below 2,000 ACTS AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER 1,500 50,000 for two years.

1,000 ACTS AGAINST PERSONS The recent drop in serious crime may have ended when the 500 number of reported index crimes began to grow between 2000 0 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 and 2001 and then climbed to nearly 46,000 in 2002. That number, however, was still lower than any time in the past Source: Annual Report of the D.C. Courts, 1982 to 2002. Washington, D.C. three decades. When measured as a per capita rate, the total number of index crimes in 2002 (8,022 crimes per 100,000) was equivalent to the rate of 1985 (7,999 per 100,000).

TABLE 3. JUVENILE VS. ADULT ARRESTS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

Number of Arrests in July and August of 2003

Juvenile Adult Violent Offenses (under age 18) (18 and older)

Murder 1 23 Rape 1 3 Robbery 22 75 Aggravated Assault 17 361

Total 41 462

Source: Monthly Arrest Statistics, Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C.

CONCLUSION FIGURE 3. Serious Crime by Offenders of All Ages in Crime statistics were very encouraging for much of the past Washington, D.C.: 1970–2002 decade. Violent crime rates in particular fell to levels not seen Reported Crimes in a generation. Crime trends are cyclical, however, and the 90,000 latest crime data in Washington, D.C. show a slight increase 80,000 70,000 in the rate of violence. Still, the magnitude of the increase is 60,000 small compared to the steep decline that came before, and it 50,000 40,000 INDEX CRIMES REPORTED cannot be described yet as a trend. Moreover, the scale of 30,000 20,000 violent crime by juveniles is small compared with the amount 10,000 0 of crime committed by adults. Violent crime in Washington 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 is still largely an adult problem. Reported Crimes per 100,000 Residents This analysis suggests that the tone of juvenile justice debate 14,000 in Washington, D.C. is overly narrow. Recent incidents of 12,000 youth violence in the city do not yet represent a significant 10,000 trend, and violence by adults is still far more pervasive and 8,000 6,000 INDEX CRIMES PER CAPITA more deadly. This does not seem to be the time to focus the 4,000 already strained resources of the justice system on inventing 2,000 new ways to crack down on juvenile violence. The juvenile 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 justice system should be learning more about what worked during the last decade and why. The city needs to build and Reported Crimes 18,000 maintain a solid foundation of programs that reduce all 16,000 forms of juvenile crime. 14,000 12,000 10,000 Finally, even if the recent growth in juvenile violence does 8,000 VIOLENT INDEX CRIMES REPORTED turn out to be the first indication of a new trend, it is difficult 6,000 4,000 to understand why policymakers believe the best response 2,000 0 to juvenile violence is to send more juvenile offenders to the 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 adult justice system. How could the adult system be an effec- tive solution to juvenile violence when juvenile and adult Reported Crimes per 100,000 Residents 3,500 violence have followed similar statistical trends? Are there 3,000 really no better ideas? 2,500 2,000 1,500 VIOLENT INDEX CRIMES PER CAPITA 1,000 500 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

FBI Index Crimes include offenses in the Violent Crime Index (murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery) and the Property Crime Index (larceny-theft, burglary, motor vehicle theft, and arson). Source: Data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Uniform Crime Reports. Figures for 1970–2001 were prepared by the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data at the University of Michigan and distributed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (data online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs). Data for 2002 were obtained from Crime in the United States 2002, a publication of the FBI. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/pdf/2sectiontwo.pdf).

About the Author Jeffrey A. Butts is director of the Program on Youth Justice This policy brief was made possible by the Justice Policy at the Urban Institute and a senior research associate in the Center at the Urban Institute and its director, Terence Institute’s Justice Policy Center. Dunworth. In collaboration with practitioners, public officials, and community groups, the Urban Institute’s Acknowledgments Justice Policy Center carries out research to inform A number of people were helpful during the preparation of the national dialogue on crime, justice, and community this brief. The author is grateful for the assistance of Megan safety.

Schaffer of the Urban Institute who organized the juvenile The Urban Institute is a nonprofit nonpartisan policy court data analyzed here. Urban Institute researchers Christy research and educational organization established to Visher, Daniel Mears, and John Roman provided helpful criti- examine the social, economic, and governance problems cisms and advice on all aspects of the analysis. In addition, the facing the nation. It provides information and analysis to author thanks Anne Grant and Erin Lane of the Washington, public and private decisionmakers to help them address D.C. Metropolitan Police Department for providing him with these challenges and strives to raise citizen understand- access to the Department’s juvenile arrest data. ing of the issues and tradeoffs in policymaking.

Endnotes Any opinions expressed are those of the author and do 1 Sewell Chan. 2003. “Shooting Highlights Crime Debate—Mayor Pushes not necessarily reflect the views of the Urban Institute, Tougher Rules on Trying Teens as Adults.” The Washington Post. November its board, or sponsors. 9, 2003, p. C01. 2 Lonn Lanza-Kaduce, Charles E. Frazier, Jodi Lane, and Donna M. Bishop. 2002. Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court Study: Final Report. Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Juvenile Justice. Lawrence Winner, Lonn Lanza-Kaduce, Donna M. Bishop, and Charles E. Frazier. 1997. “The Transfer of Juveniles to Criminal Court: Reexamining Recidivism over the Long Term.” Crime and Delinquency 43:548–63. 3 National arrest figures are from an Urban Institute analysis of data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Crime in the United States, Annual series. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 4 Arrests for 2003 were derived by averaging two different estimates. First, arrests from the first 10 months of 2003 were simply multiplied by 1.2 to represent 12 months. Second, to adjust for possible seasonality (arrests are expected to be highest in the warm weather of the spring and summer months), arrests in January and February of 2003 were used as a proxy for arrests in November and December of 2003. These two estimates were then averaged.

For more information, please visit http://www.urban.org and http://justice.urban.org