1. The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime Lesley McAra and Susan McVie University of Edinburgh

6. Key Findings Relating to Policing and Youth Justice

9. Claim1: evidence Persistent serious offending is associated with victimisation and social adversity

10. % involvement in violent offending (Robbery, carrying weapon, 6+ incidents of assault in past year)

11. Violence and vulnerability

12. Violence and vulnerability cont.

13. Violence and vulnerability cont.

14. Claim 2: evidence Early identification of at-risk children is not a water-tight process

16. How soon can we tell? cont. Behavioural problems reported in CHS/SW files by age 5 n=105 (%) Institutional pathways Referral to Reporter at age 13 37 Referral to Reporter at age 15 45 Conviction in adult system by age 22 46

18. Claim 3: evidence Critical moments in the early teenage years are key to pathways out of offending

19. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010 in press)

20. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010)

21. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010)

22. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010)

23. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010)

24. Conviction trajectories (McAra and McVie 2010 in press)

26. … they reported exactly the same levels of serious offending

30. Claim 4: evidence Diversionary strategies facilitate the desistence process

33. % Involvement in serious offending one year later

34. Within group % change in serious offending from age 15 to age 16 INTERVENTION GROUP COMPARISON GROUP Stage 1 Charge -50 (.000) -43 (.001) Stage 2 Reporter contact -39 (.001) -42 (.000) Stage 3 Supervision -31 (NS) -49 (.001)

37. The revolving door Residential care by 16 th birthday % criminal conviction by age 22 77 Residential care by 16 th birthday % imprisonment by age 22 31 Period of imprisonment by age 18 % further criminal conviction by age 22 80 Period of imprisonment by age 18 % further period of imprisonment by age 22 70 Convicted by 18 but not imprisoned % further criminal conviction by age 22 43

38. Lessons from the Edinburgh Study

42. References: McAra and McVie, 2005, The Usual Suspects? Young People, Street Life and the Police, Criminology and Criminal Justice , 5 (1):1-36 McAra and McVie, 2007a, Youth Justice? The Impact of System Contact on Patterns of Desistance from Offending, European Journal of Criminology , 4 (3) McAra and McVie, 2007b, Criminal Justice Transitions, Research Digest, no. 14 McAra and McVie, 2010a, Youth Crime and Justice: Key messages from the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime, Criminology and Criminal Justice, 10 (2): 179-209. McAra and McVie, 2010b (forthcoming), Criminal Justice Pathways: Key findings from the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime, Research Digest , no. 15 www.law.ed.ac.uk/cls/esytc/

44. Supervision requirements Nature of contact % of ‘cases’ brought to hearing (n=59) Regular child and family 63 Regular individual work with the child 25 Irregular contact 20 Specialist services Educational welfare/psychologist 56 Youth strategy group 49 Work on offending 36 Mental health services 10

46. Longer term impact of school exclusion Outcomes Those excluded by S3 n=471 % Not excluded % Serious offender at age 17/18 (self-report) 47 24 Criminal conviction by age 22 50 12 Conviction for serious violence by age 22 22 2 Imprisonment by age 22 5 0.2