“Court in the Act”

The Youth Court; The Children, Young Persons, and their Families Act 1989; And topical issues arising for NZ Youth Justice practitioners

A newsletter co-ordinated by the Principal Youth Court Judge for the Youth Justice community
Contributions, feedback and letters to the Editor are not only acceptable, but encouraged

Youth Court Website: http://www.courts.govt.nz/youth/

Issue No.12, October 2004

In This Issue…

Editorial: Purpose of “Court in the Act”
Letter to the Editor: Reparation Monies
Article: The Importance of a Young Person’s Participation in School
Stop Press: Preliminary 2003 Youth Offending Statistics Again Show Great Sstability
Poem
Feature: A Suggested Checklist for Youth Court Judges and Youth Advocates.
Feature: Some Recent Initiatives by the Hamilton Youth Offending Team:
Project Rock On Tackles Truancy The Kauri Centre: Access to Education
Article: Realising Potential – Working with Youth at Risk.
Youth Advocate Conference 2004
Key Decision: Remand in Police Custody

The Purpose of “Court In Act”

“COURT In The Act” was originally designed as a newsletter for Youth Court Judges. However, it soon became obvious that the wider youth justice community in New Zealand was interested in much of the material that was being circulated. Also there is no regular national youth justice publication to update all those involved in youth justice as to current issues, relevant cases, and important overseas developments. This is still a significant deficiency recently identified by the Youth Justice Independent Advisory Group (IAG), which I chair. The IAG has recommended that as a priority a national youth justice newsletter be established as soon as possible. At present however it seems that there are not the resources within the Ministry of Justice to produce it. Therefore I will continue to produce “Court In The Act” – but simply as a foretaste of a more organised and regular publication to come. Until the arrival of the new publication, my office will continue to act as a “clearing house” for all matters of interest regarding youth justice. I am happy to send out any items of national interest that people want to send me.

We have also collated a significant database of those receiving “Court In The Act”. If you know of others who should be on the list please contact my P.A., Jayne Collins at:

Jayne.Collins@courts.govt.nz.

Letter to the Editor: Reparation Monies

“I am the chair of the local Hamilton YOT and I know Judge Becroft has seen this problem before in his role on the Youth Justice Leadership Group, but was wondering if he had any comment on the problem that we, and I am sure most of New Zealand faces with the issue of reparation monies.

A recent amendment to Police General Instructions places a number of restrictions on the ability of police officers to accept money from offenders and their families for reparation to victims.

Child Youth and Family staff are similarly restricted, as are Solicitors / Youth Advocates (something to do with the way Trust Accounts are administered) - so who in fact should take this money?

Practitioners will tell the Judge that if you don't take the money off these offenders/families at the time - then you can kiss it good bye. It will be spent on anything other than repaying the victims.

Police General Instructions suggest practices such as Bank Cheques are the remedy, but again practitioners will tell you the vast majority of families do not have the where-with-all to obtain bank cheques on a regular basis (often reparation payments are made over a long period of time).

I would be interested in Judge Becroft's thoughts on this problem.”

Sergeant Lance Tebbutt
NZ Police, Hamilton

Judge Becroft’s response:

I am grateful to Sergeant Tebbutt for raising this issue which has be-devilled Youth Court practice for many years. The short answer is that the National Youth Justice Leadership Group (NYJLG), convened by Susan Howan, is giving attention to this matter to try to develop a national protocol. In the meantime the current, unsatisfactory, ad-hoc approach will need to continue. Each region seems to handle the issue of reparation differently. In some areas, despite Police General Instructions, Police are happy to accept cash payments. Sometimes Family Group Conference Co-ordinators will collect the money. Usually, youth advocates who have access to a trust account, will funnel the money through their accounts directly to the victims.

I quite agree that the money should be “grabbed” as soon as it is available – or else it may disappear.

I hope that the NYJLG will be able to resolve the matter soon. Watch for a new protocol in an E-Flash to the Youth Offending Teams.

The Importance of a Young Person’s Participation in School

ATTENDANCE at school is usually regarded as one of the “big four” factors that can produce resilience in a young person. All the recent research seems to indicate that increasing participation in school by young people (rather than success) is a key part in reducing their anti-social behaviour and offending.

Put another way, not all truants / non-enrolled young people offend, but almost all serious offenders are truants or not enrolled in a secondary school. While something of an overstatement, there is truth in the saying that every young person excluded from a secondary school is one more potential career criminal released into the community. Excluding a young person from school does not “solve” the problem for the community; it simply re-locates it.

The importance of school attendance and participation has been recently raised by the IAG with the Ministry of Education. One member of the six member IAG is Dr John Langley, the Principal of the Auckland College of Education. He recently wrote a feature article for the New Zealand Herald on the importance of retaining young people at school. I set it out in full as follows:

DISCIPLINE IN SCHOOLS

“During the last week several articles have appeared in the Herald on the issue of school discipline. Together they represent a shallow and insufficient analysis of the situation and possible future developments.

On Monday the front page had an article quoting a survey from the Maxim Institute indicating hat parents think discipline is a major issue in schools. That’s hardly a revelation. On Tuesday it was followed by an article about Greenmeadows intermediate in which the principal seemed to be proud of the level of stand-downs that the school has clocked up. Following hot on the heels of that was the Wednesday editorial in which general support was given to the use of stand-downs as a disciplinary approach.

Stand-downs are not a disciplinary approach. It is a last resort that is used when other approaches have failed. It is also true that for many children it does not change the behaviour that is of concern nor reach the parents who most need to be reached.

Let me be clear about two things. First, I am not condemning schools that stand-down children and young people. As a school principal some years ago I did so in extreme circumstances. Obviously, when a child or young person is a danger to themselves and others, or is abusive, it is likely that such a measure will need to be taken. However, it is normally taken when a range of other measures have been tried and failed. It is taken when the school has run out of options and has nothing left to offer the young person. It is not taken as a regular course of action and certainly should not be crowed about in the manner that has occurred here. It should also not be used for minor and trivial maters such as hairstyles jewellery preferences and uniform vagaries. Rules about such things have little to do with discipline and more to do with school image.

Secondly, strong fair and consistent discipline is absolutely necessary in any environment where effective teaching and learning are to take place. Parents have an absolute right to expect that. I don’t know of one teacher or principal anywhere who would disagree with that. You said that this message was lost on some educationalists. Which ones exactly?

Such schools regularly get punished as they end up taking more and more children who have been
excluded down the road

However, it is true that the approaches that are used do vary. Some schools take a huge amount of time and trouble to work with children and young people in order to keep them interested and engaged in education. They take them as they find them and attempt to meet their needs with the skill and resources they have t their disposal. Such schools and principals often get no recognition and even less reward for their efforts. In fact, worse than that, they regularly get punished as they end up taking more and more children who have been excluded by their colleagues down the road.

Other schools take less time and trouble with difficult students, too quickly resorting to the excusing option and then boasting that they are better schools because they “don’t put up with that kind of thing around here”.

The problem is simple and obvious. If they don’t deal with it and resort to the exclusion options, someone else has to pick up the pieces for them. I know a large number of principals around the country who have had a gutsful of having to do so and then reading leader articles such as that of the Herald in which that situation is essentially supported.

It is time for the schools that go the extra mile for their children and young people got the recognition and reward they deserve. Why not feature some of them in your columns rather than only lauding the ones who set records at standing down and excluding?

It’s been correctly pointed out that managing the behaviour of children and young people is not easy. Those of us who are parents as well as teachers are all too aware of that. It is also true that the support received from parents can be patchy to say the least. Add that the number of options available are limited, particularly as children get older.

However, there are options for disciplining children that have been well tried and researched and are used successfully in many schools all over the world. They are not “soft” options

There are options for disciplining children ... not “soft” options such as incessant counselling but … clear expectations

such as incessant counselling but involve the setting of clear expectations, the delivery of effective programmes, the use of effective pedagogy and the application of appropriate consequences. Exclusion is not one of them and must only be a very last resort if our education system is to continue to attempt to cater for all and not just for some. It is admission of failure and must be seen as such.

Good education is about effective learning. But it is also about winning the hearts and minds of our future generations. That will only happen if we all seek to keep them involved and engaged in the institutions of their communities. Not by excluding them and then viewing that as a success.

Once and for all let us recognise the importance of what good teaching is, what good schools are and the kinds of real community partnerships that are needed in order to produce the success that we are capable of. Our futures depend on it.

Dr John Langley
Principal
Auckland College of Education.”

Stop Press: Most Recent Youth Offending Statistics Now Available

DRAFT youth offending figures for 2003 are now available. They appear to indicate continuing stability. While the 14 - 16 year old population has increased significantly, the rates of offending per 10,000 still seem to be remarkably consistent and there appear to have been few changes.

The message seems to be for the last 7 to 8 years there has been relative stability. There is still a basis for cautious optimism, looking at the statistics as a whole.

The next “Court in the Act” will have available the final youth offending statistics for 2003.

Poem

I came across this short, sad, but moving poem produced by a young female offender as part of her family group conference plan. It tells its own story of the broken and mixed up lives that characterise so many serious young offenders.

Do you really know who I am?

I don’t trust you, and I don’t care
Do you know that its all just a front
I can’t, or won’t, really care for anyone
Cause nobody has really cared for me
Love what the fuck is that
My sister and brother is all I know
that will be there for me until I die
You people think you know me
You know nothing
You don’t know my pain, my feelings, my thoughts, you think you do and yes I cry, and don’t show anyone
Why? So you can judge me?
Counsel me, when you really don’t care, you go home.

Do you know, sometimes I think that I don’t belong in this world or exist and sometimes I think my family, are never there.
My life I have no life
I don’t know what love is….
Is it a smile, kindness, warmth, giving or is that all an act but love to me like a ball of pain so try to tell me what love is?

2 June 2004

FIRST SPECIAL FEATURE

A Suggested Checklist for Youth Court Judges and Youth Advocates: Key Issues to Consider in Youth Court Cases

There are a number of important procedural issues that regularly arise in the Youth Court. Here is a list of key issues that Youth Court Judges and youth advocates have been encouraged to consider in respect of cases being called in the Youth Court. All of you involved in the Youth Court process will be interested to know of these issues, as they will probably be raised in future cases.

1. Is the laying of a charge appropriate rather than “alternative action”?
See s.208(a). Should the prosecution be encouraged to withdraw the charge to allow Police Youth Aid to deal with the offending? (Note: the Youth Court, as first envisaged, was to be reserved for serious cases or serious offenders. Is the entry level into the Youth Court dropping?)

2. Has the charge been laid purely to access welfare services?
See s.208(b). If so, should the Police be encouraged to withdraw prosecution?

3. Bail breaches resulting in arrest.
Is the arrest legal under s.214? Should the Police be challenged about any bail arrest policy if there is evidence of automatic arrests?

4.
(a) Is a s.333 Report necessary?
(Psychological / Psychiatric / Forensic screening).

(b) Should a Education / Community / Cultural Report be directed?

5. Will a full risk and needs assessment be carried out?
Preferably before the FGC? If not, why not? Is a summary of assessments / conclusions available?

6. Did the victim attend the Family Group Conference?
If not, why not?

7. Family Group Conference Plan.
Adequate? Appropriate? Parity with other offenders? Apology and community work “template”, without more, is usually inadequate.

8. Has a Social Worker been appointed quickly and will the Plan be appropriately financed?
“Subject to finance / resources” plans are unacceptable: see s.268(1).

9. Proposed Orders under s.283(k) – s.283(n)
Do plans contain lawful components under the relevant sections? In particular, do proposed supervision plans list all additional conditions under s.306?

10. Has the young person been involved in all aspects of Court hearing and received appropriate explanations from the Judge and Youth Advocate?
See obligations in ss10 and 11 of the Act.

NOTE: If Information laid as result of arrest (s.246), was arrest valid and therefore is Information validly before Court (s.214)?

SECOND SPECIAL FEATURE

The Hamilton Youth Offending Team (YOT) has been something of a success story and has been at the leading edge of intiatives within its area to reduce youth offending. This special feature highlights the work of the Hamilton YOT, including a recent highly successful public meeting together with two initiatives developed by the Hamilton YOT - (1) Project “Rock On” - A truancy initiative, and, (2) “The Kauri Centre” – a programme accessing education.

Hamilton Youth Offending Team Public Forum: “Realising Potential Working Together with Youth at Risk”

On the 21 July 2004 the Hamilton Youth Offending Team organised an event for people who work with youth at-risk in the Hamilton area. The event was titled ‘Realising Potential’ and was attended by 170 people.

Why did we do it?

The idea was first proposed at our 2004 strategic planning meeting, which was held in March. We identified the need to communicate with the broader ‘youth at-risk’ sector and to develop interagency work and service development beyond the existing YOT members. To address this issue we decided to organise a big event that would generate interest and establish initial contact. Further activities, such as joint training or other projects, could be developed from there.

The event was planned to meet the following objectives:

• Promote a collaborative approach to working with youth.
• Increase the awareness of who is out there working with youth.
• Provide opportunities for interaction and networking.
• Provide opportunities to motivate each other, share ideas, successes.
• Provide an overview of the YOT, what it does and what it could do for them?

How did we organise it?

In April the YOT formed a working party to plan the event which was to be held on a Wednesday evening between 4-6pm in a conference room at the Hamilton Gardens. Invitations were produced and sent to the following organisations:

• Senior management and staff from Waikato Secondary and Intermediate schools
• Police Youth Services Team and senior Police staff
• Iwi social service providers
• Child Youth and Family social workers, youth justice coordinators and management
• Social service organisations
• Youth-focused organisations
• WINZ
• Youth Mental Health organisations
• Linkage
• Youth counsellors and Youth Workers
• Youth Court Judges
• Neighbourhood community houses
• Migrant/Refugee groups
• Resource Teachers of Learning and Behaviour (RTLB’s) ,
• transition teachers
• School counsellors
• Group Special Education (GSE)
• Alternative Education Providers
• City Councillors, MP’s,

We contacted the local newspapers and our two main papers (Waikato Times and The Hamilton Press) published an article on the Hamilton YOT and the planned event. On the day a local radio station promoted the event and the Police City Controller was interviewed.

We invited two ‘celebrities’ to speak at the event, Principle Youth Court Judge, Andrew Becroft and Jenny-May Coffin, the Captain of the Waikato ‘Magic’ Netball team and ex-Police youth aid officer / youth development officer. A presentation was also given by members of the Hamilton YOT describing the purpose of the YOT and outlining a few of our key projects. Throughout the event we tried to promote the idea of working together to develop further initiatives to improve the coordination and delivery of services to youth at-risk. The formal part of the event took approximately an hour and a half and ended with a brief discussion/question time. We also advertised our next ‘event’ which is a free joint training on ‘Understanding the Youth Justice System’.

Attendees were given a feedback sheet so we were able to gain an understanding of the issues people are facing and what can be done to support the work they are doing (unfortunately we had a poor response with only 24 people filling in a form). After that most people stayed on for finger food, tea, coffee and orange juice.

Where to from here?

As a YOT we were wary of running something that would be seen as a ‘one off’ that came to nothing, however, we were also aware we had limited resources and capacity to support other agencies and community groups. Throughout the event it was emphasised that this was the first step in the YOT helping to build a collaborative network for support and development in the youth at-risk sector.

All attendees recorded their email addresses and we have created a group list to communicate upcoming events / training and elicit further ideas or feedback. Those that attended ‘Realising Potential’ indicated interest in participating in low/no cost joint training events. Our first such training is in September and we plan to continue to provide these on a bi-monthly basis.

The presentation by Judge Becroft and the YOT emphasised the key role that education plays in positive youth development and the importance of supporting the education sector in the work they do with youth at-risk. The feedback we have received from the education sector (teachers, RTLB’s, school counsellors, GSE etc) indicates a keen desire to develop both networks within the education sector and with other agencies who are working in this area. In response to this, together with the Ministry of Education we are planning some initiatives to help create further opportunities for people in the education sector to:

• Create links to other agencies and sectors.
• Participate in professional development that will support and help hone interventions targeting youth at-risk.
• Collectively identify and address gaps, concerns, and potential solutions.

What did we achieve?

• Communicated with the wider youth at-risk sector the purposes of the YOT
• Created opportunities for further coordination and development in the sector
• Motivated people and improved their understanding of the current issues in youth offending.
• Created a sense of accomplishment for our YOT

Melanie Atkinson,
Hamilton
August 2004

Project Rock On – a Truancy Initiative

THIS project was set up by the North Hamilton Police last year to combat an increase in daytime crime, particularly burglaries, in the area.

It is based on an inter-agency approach where a number of people from the police, local schools, and government and community agencies meet monthly to discuss ways of engaging young people who are truant or non-enrolled back into the education system in the most appropriate manner. As one of the schools in the area, Fairfield College was asked to participate in this initiative.

At each meeting, young people who have been identified as at-risk of offending or who are already offending, are discussed and key agencies are asked to work with that person and his or her family in order to effect change.

Most of the names on the list are of those who are not engaged in education or who are involved in alternative education courses but who are not attending regularly. Some are
on training or correspondence courses because they have been excluded from school. Some are students at our school and we have found that they soon move off the list once interventions are put in place. These are often students who have had a great deal of school-based interventions that have had not been as successful as hoped. This is where the inter-agency approach is effective.

Students often need a firm message about school attendance … and the police can impress on families and individuals the gravity of the situation

The families of young people who are identified as at risk are notified by the police and made aware of their obligations under the law. Families often welcome the support that is being offered. A memorandum of understanding signed by all the agencies involved protects privacy.

Following the setting up of Rock On and reflecting the enhanced relationship between the school and police, a sub-committee of Rock On was established this year involving the

Senior Sergeant, the Community Constable, a community worker, our school Social Worker and myself to work exclusively with our students who were not attending school regularly but who do not fit the at-risk category of the Rock On group. This sub-committee has done the most to effect change in our school in regards to attendance. Students discussed at these meetings are often in need of a firm message about school attendance and the police, while not being heavy handed in their approach, can often impress on the families and individuals involved the gravity of the situation that the school acting alone has not been able to do.

The Police have noticed a downturn in the number of young people seen on the streets and students are aware of their involvement

The police have noticed a downturn in the number of young people seen on the streets and the students are aware of their involvement with the school. Our truancy rate was around 7% at the last national survey which is in line with current statistics but we would like this to be even lower. One concern is the amount of parent-condoned truancy. Students may be at home caring for younger siblings or keeping parents company. Some students who refuse to attend school have parents who lack the skills to ensure their attendance. These are some of the social issues that a lower decile school such as ours often faces and it has been rewarding to work with others to change patterns of behaviour and attitude.

Rock On is a successful example of a community approach to the issue of truancy.

Freda Wilson
Assistant Principal
Fairfield College, Hamilton
August 2004

The ‘Kauri Centre’ - Accessing Education Programme

THE Hamilton Youth Offending Team are working together to improve access to education for young offenders in Child, Youth and Family (CYF) custody.

Late last year the YOT became concerned that many young people placed in Hamilton Family Homes had been out of school for long periods and were not receiving any education while in care. Local schools were often reluctant to enroll these young people, who they saw as disruptive, and the Police were concerned that they were committing further offences while in the Family Home. The situation was exacerbating the problems these young people already faced and made their return to the community more difficult.

The ‘Kauri Centre’ is the Hamilton YOT’s collaborative solution to these issues. The Centre is a surplus Family Home that has been turned into a site for accessing education. Establishing the Centre was a true team effort involving:

• CYF who altered the Family Home to create a classroom size space and installed five computers. CYF also pays for a ‘minder’, if this is needed because of concerns about a young person’s behaviour, and contributes to the cost of employing a teacher-aide;

• The Ministry of Education who set up the education programme, working with the Correspondence School to provide on-line distance learning. The Ministry also provides specialist assessment and support services through Group Special Education and fund a teacher (with experience in special education) and teacher-aide (along with CYF) positions;

• The Police who are using one of their minibuses to transport the students to and from the Kauri Centre each day.

The Kauri Centre is managed by the three agencies. It began taking students in March of this year and up to 10 students participate in the programme at any one time. The Centre is open 9am – 3pm, Monday to Friday. The length of stay in the Centre depends on the individual circumstances of the students and long-term placement arrangements being made but so far a few students have moved on and a few who began in March are still there

Students have been positive and keen to participate … none have offended while on the programme

Murray Williams, the Ministry of Education representative on the YOT, says the aim is to ensure the students continue with their education while in the Family Home, and are prepared for enrolment in a mainstream school or a training programme on their return to their community. Ministry staff, in collaboration with CYF, work with the young person and the education provider to ensure that there is a smooth transition once the young person leaves the Family Home. Participation in the Kauri Centre programme has meant that local schools are more willing to give many of these young people a second chance.

The students have been very positive about the programme, keen to participate, and enjoy the online learning environment. None have re-offended while on the programme.

An evaluator will be contracted to assess the impact the Kauri Centre is having on education, justice and other outcomes.

For more details on this initiative please contact Murray Williams at Murray.Williams@minedu.govt.nz or Ph (07) 8587158.

Youth Advocates Conference

THE New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) ran a very successful Youth Advocate’s Conference held in Wellington 9-10 August 2004, which was attended by about 110 youth advocates from all over New Zealand. I attended the whole conference.

For your interest I attach a copy of the Conference programme. If you are interested in obtaining the full conference booklet, as there are many interesting and helpful papers contained in it, you should contact the Continuing Legal Education Department of the NZLS. They cost approximately $38.00 each.

In particular a major part of the first day of the Conference covered “best practice” in the Youth Court. All youth advocates were given a copy of part of the Youth Court Judges’ Benchbook, which is based on a paper originally circulated to youth advocates by Judge Carruthers in 1999, and subsequently built on. I think it now represents the agreed, consensus position as to best practice throughout the country. I have asked that it be distributed to all Police Youth Aid staff, and CYFS personnel who regularly appear in the Youth Court. I think it is important that all who appear in the Youth Court clearly understand what is expected of them when they appear and the likely processes that they will be part of. If you have not yet received a copy of this paper, you could contact Inspector Chris Graveson at Police National Headquarters or Jayne Collins at my office.

I found the conference of enormous value, and I was encouraged and impressed by the commitment, enthusiasm and expertise of the youth advocates who attended. Hopefully this conference can become a more regular part of the youth justice calendar.

Key Case

Whether a troubled and difficult young offender should be remanded in CYFS custody under s238(1)(d) or in Police custody under s238(1)(e) under the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989

HIS Honour, Judge David Harvey in Manukau, has recently delivered two important decisions in relation to the custody of a troubled young offender, while on remand.

The first judgment concerns an application by CYFS to have BT remanded in Police custody under s.238(1)(e) rather than holding him in a CYFS residence. BT was a particularly difficult young offender who had previously served a sentence in a CYFS residence. He was considered by CYFS to be unmanageable. Judge Harvey’s decision examines the prerequisites to a s.238(1)(e) order and indicates that such an order is not to be used simply as a substitute for a s.238(1)(d) order, nor where CYFS is unwilling (though arguably able) to care for a difficult young person in a residence.

The second judgment relates to a subsequent application by CYFS to have BT placed in a penal institution under s.238(1)(A)-(C) Children Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989. The judgment examines the six prerequisites to such an order, set out in s.293(3), and, in particular, the requirement that it be “in all the circumstances appropriate”.

In both cases, orders were made that BT be remanded in CYFS custody under s.238(1)(d). In the second, 14 days secure care was also ordered.

Copies of these decisions can be obtained from my office through Jayne Collins if you want to read them in detail.