Racial gap in juvenile arrests seen in St. Louis County Family Court

Incarceration rates for black children in Missouri are 300 percent higher than for white children.

When in custody, black children will stay in detention longer and are more likely to be certified as adults instead of handled in the juvenile justice system.

And few of the children, black or white, are represented by counsel.

The data, compiled in various reports in recent years, isn’t broken down by county, but St. Louis County Family Court, the largest in the state, now finds itself the target of a U.S. Department of Justice investigation based on “a number of allegations that juveniles’ due process and equal protection rights were being violated,” according to a DOJ statement.

The DOJ last week announced its investigation after it “determined that the allegations supported” opening one. The special litigation section of the Civil Rights Division will review policies, procedures, court documents and statistical data, according to the DOJ. A previous federal investigation of a similar sort, in Shelby County and Memphis, Tenn., took three years and resulted in a memorandum of agreement that will likely take three more years to comply with, and the city and county are responsible for the costs associated with achieving compliance.

Paul Fox, the director of judicial administration for St. Louis County, said he was unsure of the reason for the investigation and that the court is cooperating fully.

“We believe we’ve been following the law as much as we can, state and federal law,” Fox said. “We try to protect their civil rights as much as possible, making sure they have an attorney, having their parents involved whenever possible.”

Fox said last week that the DOJ had not yet asked for any specific documentation, but he expects requests to start this week.

The DOJ’s statements have not pointed out specific complaints or allegations, and family court attorneys and personnel were reluctant to speculate.

Data compiled by the Missouri Supreme Court’s Office of State Courts Administrator as well as academic studies indicate a pattern of disparity in how black and white juvenile offenders move through the system statewide. They also point out that Missouri’s idiosyncratic juvenile court system leads few young offenders to seek legal representation.

OSCA’s Missouri Juvenile & Family Division Annual Report from 2012 lays out clear racial disparities between black and white offenders in Missouri.

The average daily population for black youth in detention statewide is 100, while on average 86 white youth are detained. According to 2012 U.S. Census data, blacks make up nearly 12 percent of the population of Missouri, but they make up nearly 54 percent of the incarcerated youth population.

The same data set from OSCA says black kids stay in detention on average 14 days. White kids average 10 days in detention.

Juvenile offenders can be certified as adults if their crimes merit it. State statute directs judges to consider 10 factors in certification, including the seriousness of the crime, the likelihood of the child’s successful rehabilitation, family support and the possibility of racial discrimination at play.

In 2012, according to OSCA, 55 children were certified as adults in court. Black youths were 54 percent of that total. White youths made up 44 percent, with other ethnicities making up the other 2 percent.

A 2013 study by the National Juvenile Defender Center, “Missouri: Justice Rationed,” highlights ways that kids go through the court system perhaps confused, and often without an attorney.

A child arrested in Missouri comes under the care of a deputy juvenile officer, an employee of the circuit’s juvenile office. The system is unique to Missouri, according to the study. Deputy juvenile officers investigate offenses and can determine if charges progress to court or are disposed through more informal means, according to state statute.

The National Juvenile Defender Center study calls out deputy juvenile officers specifically as confusing because of their dual roles: They Mirandize young offenders and are present in interrogations, but they also make charging decisions and file petitions.

In the 2011 Bustamante case, where a Missouri teenager murdered her young neighbor, the judge in an order sustaining the defendant’s motion to suppress noted that the teenager was “likely mislead” by her deputy juvenile officer describing herself as the defendant’s “advocate.”

Mae C. Quinn is a law professor and co-director of the Civil Justice Clinic and Juvenile Rights and Re-Entry Project at Washington University School of Law. The clinic, she said, has studied and raised the issue of what she calls the “unconstitutional and conflicted” juvenile court system.

“There appears to be great confusion in roles where deputy juvenile officers engage in conversation and communication with youth without attorneys present, without sufficient regard for attorneys or the right to counsel, and children and families are left to wonder if the deputy juvenile officer is their lawyer,” Quinn said.

The National Juvenile Defender Center study says “[i]n the absence of a juvenile defender, the child must rely on the opinion of the DJO who investigated the charges, conducted the interrogation, extracted a statement, and formalized the petition.”

The study also says that young offenders waive the right to counsel at an “alarmingly high” rate. In 2012, OSCA reported 4,631 new juvenile delinquency cases. The Missouri State Public Defender System, according to the study, reported that it was assigned 1,923 juvenile delinquency cases and that it contracted out 24 cases to private counsel. That leaves almost 60 percent of young offenders not using public defenders.

Concrete numbers on how many in that 60 percent seek private counsel, the study says, are unavailable. But the study found kids going through the system without counsel and waiving the right to an attorney without understanding what an attorney would do for them or under financial pressure.

Quinn said she was heartened to read press reports that St. Louis County court officials plan to cooperate with the investigation. She wouldn’t say if her clinic generated any of the complaints to the Department of Justice.

Tony Rothert, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri, said in a statement that he has long heard reports of problems in the county system, but with juvenile proceedings and records sealed, it’s difficult to examine evidence. “Therefore,” he said, “we welcome a DOJ investigation to cut through the secrecy and get to the root of any problems.”