By Citizens for Juvenile Justice
This report by Citizens for Juvenile Justice (CfJJ) investigates the level of information sharing and collusion between police and courthouse staff with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Massachusetts. CfJJ filed more than 90 public records requests in the state and found that police and courthouse staff regularly share information with ICE, effectively becoming “force multipliers” for ICE. This report details specific ways police and courthouse staff are cooperating with ICE and cautions that this
practice undermines public trust, legitimacy, and democratic accountability. This report offers key policy and narrative recommendations to create guardrails around information sharing practices with ICE, including a proposed ban on transmitting youth fingerprints to the FBI (which are then shared with ICE).
By Graeme R. Newman and Claude AI.
LIs probation mercy, or is it a serious way of changing lives?
In 1933 probation was in use in every state, and no one could say what it accomplished. Probation and Criminal Justice, edited by Sheldon Glueck of the Harvard Law School, brought together judges, social workers, a psychiatrist, a criminologist, the builder of the new federal system, and four foreign authorities to ask how it should be done. Their answer: probation succeeds or fails according to the people who run it, and a community that wants its benefits must pay for good officers and be honest about how little it knows.
This Reader's Guide explains the arguments in plain language, supplies the history and law, and shows what has changed since. Inside are a chapter map, a worked example that turns the book's own numbers into caseloads and costs, common misreadings, and discussion questions.
A companion to the original, for students, practitioners and curious readers. Read online the original book.
Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.64.
By The Australian Human Rights Commission'
The Commission's submission to the NSW Select Committee on Youth Justice highlights the need to move away from punitive responses to children’s offending and towards evidence‑based approaches that address underlying causes and improve outcomes for children and communities.
Raymond B. Fosdick. Designed and Edited with an Introduction by Graeme R. Newman and Claude.
A landmark classic in the history of policing, public administration, and criminal justice reform.
When Raymond B. Fosdick published Police Administration in 1921 as part of the renowned Cleveland Foundation Survey of Criminal Justice, he delivered one of the most penetrating examinations ever undertaken of an American police department. More than a century later, his analysis remains remarkably relevant.
Confronted by rising crime and concerns about police effectiveness, Cleveland commissioned an independent investigation of its law enforcement system. Fosdick responded with a rigorous, evidence-based study that compared American policing with the more professionalized police systems of Europe. His conclusions were blunt: crime was not simply the product of social conditions, but also of outdated organization, weak leadership, inadequate training, political interference, and a failure to adapt policing to the demands of the modern city.
This groundbreaking work examines every major aspect of police administration, including:
Police organization and leadership
Recruitment, selection, and training of officers
Promotion and discipline systems
Patrol operations and crime prevention
Detective bureau management
Personnel administration and record keeping
Accountability, professionalism, and public service
Fosdick's recommendations anticipated many reforms that would shape twentieth-century policing: merit-based advancement, professional training academies, modern management practices, specialized investigative units, and the use of data and performance measurement in public administration.
This new edition includes a substantial introduction by criminologist Graeme R. Newman, placing Fosdick's work in historical context and exploring its continuing significance in contemporary debates over police reform, professionalism, accountability, and governance.
More than a historical document, Police Administration is an essential source for understanding the origins of modern policing and the enduring challenges of managing police organizations in democratic societies.
Ideal for readers interested in:
Police history
Criminal justice
Criminology
Public administration
American legal history
Progressive Era reform
Law enforcement studies
Government and public policy
A century after its publication, Fosdick's classic reminds us that effective policing depends not only on laws and officers, but on leadership, organization, and the intelligent administration of justice.
Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.104.
By Graeme R. Newman and Claude AI.
A landmark investigation into how America's criminal justice system actually worked, and why it often failed.
In 1921, a series of scandals and rising public concern about crime prompted the Cleveland Foundation to commission an unprecedented examination of the administration of justice in Cleveland, Ohio. Directed by two of the most influential legal minds of the twentieth century, Roscoe Pound and Felix Frankfurter, the resulting study became one of the most important reform documents in American criminal justice history.
Originally published in 1922, Criminal Justice in Cleveland was the first comprehensive effort to analyze an entire urban justice system as an interconnected whole. Drawing on detailed investigations of police, prosecutors, courts, corrections, probation, legal education, medical science, and the press, the survey revealed a system plagued by inefficiency, poor record-keeping, fragmented authority, political influence, and a startling lack of accountability.
This modernized edition, edited and introduced by Graeme R. Newman, makes this classic study accessible to today's readers while preserving its most important findings, statistics, and arguments. Readers will discover:
• How police departments operated in major American cities during the early twentieth century
• Why so many criminal cases disappeared before reaching trial
• The hidden influence of politics, public opinion, and newspapers on justice
• Early debates over probation, parole, rehabilitation, and sentencing reform
• The origins of evidence-based criminal justice research
• Reform proposals that continue to resonate more than a century later
Written during the Progressive Era but strikingly relevant today, Criminal Justice in Cleveland demonstrates that many of the challenges confronting modern police, prosecutors, courts, and correctional institutions are far older than most people realize. Its authors recognized that successful reform requires more than replacing individuals; it requires understanding how institutions work, how they fail, and how they can be improved.
Essential reading for students of criminology, criminal justice professionals, legal scholars, historians, policymakers, and anyone interested in the evolution of the American justice system.
More than a century after its publication, this pioneering study remains one of the most insightful examinations ever written of crime, law, and urban justice in America
Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2026. p.90.
Criminal Justice in Cleveland was one of the most influential studies of the American criminal justice system produced during the Progressive Era. Published by The Cleveland Foundation, the volume brought together leading legal scholars, reformers, and public officials, including Raymond Fosdick, Roscoe Pound, Felix Frankfurter, and others, to examine the administration of justice in Cleveland, Ohio. The work was directed and edited by Roscoe Pound and Felix Frankfurter.
Rather than focusing solely on crime, the study investigated the entire machinery of justice, including police, prosecutors, courts, probation services, corrections, and related public institutions. The authors sought to determine how effectively these agencies worked together, where delays and inefficiencies occurred, and what reforms were needed to create a more fair, efficient, and accountable system of justice.
The survey became a landmark in empirical legal research because it relied on systematic investigation rather than anecdote or political opinion. Its findings helped shape twentieth-century reforms in policing, court administration, criminal procedure, and corrections, making it essential reading for historians, criminologists, legal scholars, and students of public administration.
Today, Criminal Justice in Cleveland remains a classic study of urban criminal justice and a foundational text in the movement to evaluate government institutions through rigorous research and evidence-based reform.
By the staff of Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff and Republican Rep. Jen Kiggans
U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia and Representative Jen Kiggans of Virginia have launched a bipartisan investigation into the incarceration of children with mental health conditions in juvenile detention facilities (“facilities”)—centers designed to detain children charged with or sentenced for delinquent offenses—across the United States. As part of this investigation, beginning in May 2024, Sen. Ossoff and Rep. Kiggans surveyed facilities about what circumstances lead to the prolonged detention of children with mental health conditions and children who have not been charged with offenses. In survey responses, 75 facilities across 25 states reported incarcerating children who could be eligible for release to mental health care programs outside the facility but remained incarcerated because the care they needed was not yet available. More than half of these facilities reported incarcerating children in these circumstances for at least one month, and some reported incarcerating children in these circumstances for up to a year. Facilities reported incarcerating children who are on the autism spectrum, who have general neurodevelopmental issues, or who engage in severe self-harm, who could be eligible for release to an external program or health facility. One facility in North Dakota reported that children “with neurodevelopmental issues sometimes are held the longest, while waiting on forensic evaluations of competency.” Twenty responding facilities in 13 states reported incarcerating children either with no charges or with charges that would not ordinarily lead to placement in juvenile detention. Many of these facilities reported incarcerating these children because they needed mental health services outside of the facility that were not yet available or needed mental health care available at the facility and not outside. One facility reported that, in the year before the survey was administered, it held as many as 29 children without charges or with charges that would not ordinarily lead to detention due to a lack of available offsite mental health care. Another facility reported that, in the year before the survey was administered, it held 10 children in these circumstances solely so that they could access internal mental health services not available outside the facility. Another reported incarcerating children in these circumstances for more than a year due to lack of offsite mental health care. Six facilities reported incarcerating children beyond their expected release dates after their charges were dropped or sentences completed, due to lack of available offsite mental health care. One facility reported that it had held roughly 50 children under these circumstances in the year before the survey was administered alone.According to experts in pediatric care, incarcerated children have high rates of physical, mental health and developmental needs that may be undiagnosed or under-addressed in custodial facilities. Incarcerated children also face limited access to evidence-based medical care and a lack of educational opportunities. Other experts warn that incarcerating children can cause adverse lifelong medical and mental health outcomes including higher rates of depression, and suicidality.
By Haoyao He
The phenomenon of delinquency among young people is one that is pervasive in the culture of today. Criminal laws in many countries frequently adopt unique procedures that are separate from those that are used to deal with adult delinquency when dealing with juveniles. These strategies are employed to deal with juveniles. It is because of the distinct psychological, physiological, and socialization levels that are linked with juveniles that this is the case. Not only does this unique scenario serve as an illustration of the humanitarian principles of criminal law, but it also serves as an illustration of the fundamental value orientation of giving precedence to the preservation and correction of the rights of children. In the framework of China's criminal law, the objective of this article is to analyze the legal underpinnings that underpin the specialized treatment of juvenile delinquency, as well as its institutional practice and process of optimization. Specifically, the study will focus on the treatment of juveniles who have committed crimes.
By Anesa Agovic
Money laundering remains a key enabler of organized crime in the Western Balkans, allowing criminal networks to legitimize illicit profits and integrate them into the formal economy. This report examines current trends, typologies and vulnerabilities shaping the region’s illicit financial flows.
The study outlines how systemic corruption, weak regulatory oversight, and a sizeable informal economy create fertile ground for laundering proceeds from drug trafficking, firearms smuggling, human trafficking, migrant smuggling, tax evasion and cyber-enabled crime. Key sectors, including construction, real estate and cash-intensive businesses, are often exploited, with typologies such as bulk cash smuggling, corporate layering, trade-based money laundering, underpriced real estate transactions and loan-back schemes featuring prominently.
Professional enablers, such as notaries, accountants, attorneys, and even entertainment celebrities, facilitate the integration of dirty money. The infiltration of law enforcement, misuse of remittance channels and the rise of digital currencies further complicate detection and prosecution.
The report also explores gender dynamics, highlighting the increasing role of women in money laundering activities. While some women play direct roles in financial transactions, others support criminal networks through their positions in professional sectors.
Hotspots for money laundering are often found in capitals, major cities and tourist destinations, where high-value real estate transactions and significant cash flows occur. The impact of global affairs, such as geopolitical shifts and technological advances, has amplified existing vulnerabilities.
The study calls for intensifying the prosecution of money laundering as a standalone crime, strengthening asset recovery, and reinforcing transparency across financial systems. Enhanced cooperation at the regional and international levels is vital to tackle transnational laundering schemes effectively.
This publication is part one of a two-part study of illicit finance and anti-money laundering in the Western Balkans, produced by the GI-TOC’s Observatory of Illicit Economies in South Eastern Europe with the support of the UK government’s Integrated Security Fund.
Understanding the methods and networks behind money laundering empowers governments, law enforcement, prosecutors, policymakers and civil society to disrupt the cycle of organized crime. The report underscores that combating money laundering requires addressing its root causes, from organized corruption to the misuse of legal entities and professional enablers, and demands more resilient institutions, independent regulatory bodies and robust civil society oversight.
Geneva, SWIT: Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime. 2025. 72p.
By Lucy Sorensen, Charmaine N. Willis, Victor Asal, and Melissa L. Breger
International attention to the issue of children’s rights and dignity has grown in recent years, both culminating in—and then drawing momentum from— the landmark United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1989. The CRC represents a changing international consensus on the rights of children, emphasizing that children, as human beings, should have a certain level of autonomy and codified legal protections (Hammarberg 1990; Melton 2005; Reynaert et al. 2009). It is formidable in its range of provisions and its specificity: it states that children have the right to have their basic needs fulfilled (addressing issues of hunger, health care, edu- cation, and play); the right to participate in decisions affecting their own well-being; and the right to be free from harm (Hammarberg 1990; Melton 2005).
2024, 23p.
By Sheldon Glueck (Author), Graeme Newman (Introduction)
Sheldon Glueck’s Probation and Criminal Justice (1931), a collection of papers from world wide experts, stands as one of the earliest systematic examinations of probation within the American penal system. Published at a time when probation was still consolidating its place as a regularized judicial practice, the book sought both to describe the institution as it existed and to evaluate its possibilities as a rational and humane alternative to imprisonment. Glueck, already well known as a criminologist and later famed for his longitudinal studies on criminal careers, approached probation with the same empirical rigor and critical balance that defined his scholarship.
The work provides a historical account of probation’s origins, tracing its roots to the nineteenth-century innovations of John Augustus in Boston, and situates its emergence within the broader reform movements of the Progressive Era. By the early 1930s, probation had spread widely across American jurisdictions, yet it lacked the uniformity, resources, and professional standards necessary for consistent success. Glueck’s central argument was therefore twofold: probation held genuine promise as an instrument of rehabilitation and social reintegration, but its potential could only be realized through careful administration, adequately trained personnel, and an honest reckoning with its limitations.
To read Probation and Criminal Justice today is to encounter both a historical document and a surprisingly contemporary critique. The themes Glueck emphasized—the professionalization of probation officers, the dangers of excessive caseloads, the necessity of balancing rehabilitation with accountability—are still at the heart of debates over community supervision. The persistence of these concerns is a testament both to the enduring complexity of probation as a penal tool and to the prescience of Glueck’s analysis.
In this sense, the book is more than a relic of early twentieth-century criminology. It is a reminder that penal reform, however well intentioned, remains fragile unless supported by adequate resources, clear objectives, and sustained public commitment. Probation has advanced since Glueck’s time in terms of reach, sophistication, and legitimacy, yet the paradoxes he identified continue to shape its practice.
For scholars, practitioners, and students of criminal justice, this volume offers not only a window into the early years of probation but also a mirror reflecting ongoing challenges in community-based corrections. Glueck’s careful and critical study thus retains its relevance: a classic text that still speaks to the unfinished project of building a fair, effective, and humane system of criminal justice.
Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2025. 211 p.
By Kelley, L., Vignati, J., Wilkens-Earle, B., Grey, O., & Haberlen DeWolf, M.
Georgia’s juvenile justice system is at a crucial juncture, facing both significant challenges and promising opportunities for reform. This extensive analysis offers a comprehensive overview of the system’s structure, key partners, recent reforms, and ongoing issues. It aims to inform policymakers, advocates, and community leaders about the current state of juvenile justice in Georgia and guide efforts to improve outcomes for justice-involved youth. The landscape of juvenile justice in Georgia is intricate and unique. The state operates a functionally bifurcated system, with stateadministered “dependent” courts and locally operated “independent” courts, resulting in a patchwork of practices and policies across the state. This bifurcation poses challenges in standardizing approaches and collecting comprehensive data. According to its fiscal year (FY) 2023 annual report, the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) supervised more than 9,000 youth daily, with secure facilities admitting more than 7,000 individuals and maintaining an average daily population of 1,051. However, these figures only partially tell the story. One of the most pressing issues confronting juvenile systems across the country is the overrepresentation of Black youth in the juvenile justice process. In Georgia, this overrepresentation is significant and increases as Black youth move through every stage of the juvenile justice process. This disparity indicates deeper systemic problems that require urgent attention and targeted interventions. The analysis also reveals troubling trends in behavioral health among justice-involved youth. In FY 2023, 65% of youth in long-term confinement and 48% in short-term detention were on the mental health caseload, underscoring the critical need for enhanced behavioral health services within the juvenile justice system and local communities. The intersection of education and juvenile justice presents another area for improvement. There are significant racial disparities in academic achievement, school discipline, and dropout rates. Zero-tolerance policies and the presence of law enforcement in schools may contribute to the “school-to-prison pipeline,” pushing students, particularly students of color, into the juvenile justice system for behaviors that would be better addressed within the home and community. Family and community factors play a crucial role in youth outcomes as well. Poverty, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and lack of community resources are identified as risk factors for juvenile justice involvement. The analysis found that 18% of children in Georgia have experienced two or more ACEs, with higher rates among Black and Hispanic children, highlighting the need for traumainformed approaches and community-based interventions across the state. The report also addresses issues surrounding focus populations within the juvenile justice system. Georgia remains one of just four states that process 17-year-olds in the adult criminal justice system, a practice widely criticized by juvenile justice advocates. Additionally, the treatment of youth charged with serious, violent felonies (Senate Bill 440 cases) and those sentenced to life without parole raises questions about age-appropriate responses to even the most severe offenses. Data collection and information sharing also pose a challenge. The lack of a comprehensive statewide data system impedes effective analysis and decision-making. Cross-agency information sharing is limited in Georgia, particularly for youth involved in multiple systems, making the provision of coordinated, holistic care difficult. Workforce challenges within the juvenile justice system present another hurdle, particularly in secure facilities. DJJ faces substantial retention and recruitment difficulties, especially for juvenile correctional officers. High turnover rates and staffing shortages impact quality of care and safety, potentially undermining rehabilitation efforts. However, with great challenge comes great opportunity. This report proposes a series of recommendations to address these multifaceted issues, including expanding community-based alternatives to detention and incarceration, enhancing behavioral health services, addressing racial and ethnic disparities, improving data systems, strengthening inter-agency collaboration, and investing in workforce development. Additionally, this report recommends raising the age of juvenile court jurisdiction and considering policy reform related to serious offenders, implementing a comprehensive plan for CHINS cases, and studying the impact of juvenile fines and fees.
Atlanta, GA : Voices for Georgia’s Children, 2025. 170p.
By Jonathan Gu
Between 2016 and 2023, the number of young people aged 10 to 13 years found guilty of an offence fell markedly. This paper examines if this decline and other trends can be explained by the 2016 High Court of Australia decision (RP v R (‘RP’)), which clarified the application of doli incapax. We examine trends in: (1) the volume of court appearances for 10-13 year olds, (2) whether these court appearances resulted in a proven offence, (3) for proven matters, the severity of the penalty, (4) the extent to which prosecutors withdrew all charges, and (5) the extent of guilty pleas. METHOD We analyse NSW and national data on outcomes from Children’s Court cases involving 10-17 year olds, finalised between 2010 and 2023. Using these data, we investigate whether and why the five outcomes have changed over time for 10-13 year olds. Possibilities examined include: the RP decision; trends in the nature of the offence children have been accused of; the increased use of specialist Magistrates in the NSW Children’s Court; and demographics of defendants. RESULTS There is little evidence to suggest that the RP decision had any impact on the volume of court appearances involving a 10-13 year old. However, among 10-13 year olds that NSW Police proceeded against to court, there has been a dramatic decline in the proportion with a proven court outcome; the percent proven fell from 76% in the 2015-16 financial year to 16% in 2022- 23, which temporally coincides with the RP decision. Among the proven matters, the RP decision had no clear impact on the penalty imposed. The decrease in the proportion of proven charges cannot be explained by changes in the types of offences committed by 10-13 year olds (i.e., they are not increasingly committing types of crimes that are harder to prosecute), nor by specialist Magistrates, or the demographic characteristics of individuals proceeded against. The drop in proven matters is, however, linked with prosecutors increasingly withdrawing all charges (growing from 12% to 53% from 2015-16 to 2022-23) and 10-13 year olds pleading guilty less frequently (falling from 54% to 14% from 2015-16 to 2022-23). Similar shifts occurred in Victoria and South Australia. CONCLUSION By stipulating what is required to rebut doli incapax, the 2016 High Court of Australia’s decision RP v R likely reduced the number of young people aged 10-13 found guilty of a criminal offence.
(Crime and Justice Bulletin No. 268).
Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research 2025. 38p.