Fire interest and antisociality as risk factors in the severity and persistence of juvenile firesetting.

OBJECTIVE: In the DSM-IV-TR, firesetting is included as a criterion for the diagnoses of conduct disorder and pyromania. The link between firesetting and antisocial behavior is well established in the empirical literature. Although theoretical models of firesetting often include fire interest as a putative risk factor, there is little research on the role of fire interest in firesetting or on the construct of pyromania. METHOD: The present study evaluated a sample of children and adolescents referred to an outpatient specialty program for juvenile firesetters with firesetting as the primary presenting problem. By assessing fire interest and antisocial behavior concurrently, the contribution of fire interest to firesetting after controlling for the role of conduct problems was evaluated. RESULTS: Results revealed that fire interest and antisocial behavior were significantly and positively correlated. Moreover, variations in fire interest added to the prediction of firesetting severity at assessment and firesetting recidivism at 18-month follow-up above and beyond what was predicted by antisociality alone. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have implications for an empirically derived taxonomy of pathological firesetting.

The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes.

With the progression to more adult-like policies and procedures for youth in the justice system, the right to a jury trial has been extended to young offenders. These youth would not be tried by a jury of their peers, however, but by a jury of adults. The concern is that adult jurors may hold negative attitudes about youth that might influence their decision making in a case involving a young defendant. Two studies examined whether and under what conditions defendant's age affects jurors' decisions about the guilt and sentencing of an accused. In study 1, data were gathered from two samples of jury eligible adults: one university sample and one public sample. Mock jurors read written transcripts of a trial involving a defendant who was presented as either 13, 17, or 25 years of age. Results indicated that the defendant's age had no effect on mock jurors' verdict or their ratings of defendant guilt. However, younger defendants were granted shorter sentences than the adult defendants. In study 2, mock jurors read the same trial presented in study 1 but were asked to deliberate about the case and render group verdicts. These group verdicts did not differ significantly by defendant's age. Age-related themes that emerged from group deliberations were identified, and results indicated that age tended to be used as a mitigating factor in favor of youth rather than against them. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for youth justice policy and practice.