As part of a multi-site study funded by the MacArthur Foundation, CRAWL is examining developmental differences on a set of skills known as executive function that are important for controlled, reasoned, and planned aspects of behavior as compared to the more automatic, impulsive, and reflexive processes. We focus on the development of these particular skills because they relate to criteria that are considered mitigating circumstances in legal theory and practice. This study will help us understand how children, adolescents, and adults make decisions in everyday life. Although the present study examines cognitive abilities in more detail, we will consider the interface of emotional and psychosocial factors as well. The long term goal is to use what is learned about age and differences in decision-making abilities to help develop programs and policies that are more sensitive to the needs of youth.

Interrogation presents a unique nexus of developmental and legal challenges for youth. The legal system is in some ways entirely clear in its approach to juvenile offenders. They are guaranteed constitutional rights just as adults are--the right to remain silent, the right to counsel--and it is the juvenile alone who can assert or waive those rights; no one can do so on the behalf of, or in place of, the juvenile. Yet, case law, policies, and procedures recognize that youth are not similarly situated as adults in their cognitive and psychosocial capacities to respond, withstand, or succumb to the demands of the interrogation context. From a law enforcement perspective, interrogation of juveniles may or may not differ from standard practices with adults. Although the ultimate goal may be to elicit a confession, a productive interrogation is one that elicits truthful and useful information about a case. CRAWL is assembling several studies examining adolescent and police experiences in the interrogation process; we hope to assist law enforcement and adolescents by identifying possible practices that are effective interrogation tools while also respecting the unique position of adolescents in the legal system.

The interview and interrogation of juvenile suspects remains an understudied phenomenon. An emerging body of work examines juveniles' legal and psychosocial competence to understand and waive or assert important rights in interrogation. This increasing literature on the juveniles' developmental and legal capacities, however, emerges against a virtually nonexistent empirical backdrop regarding actual practice. That is, we do now know how often, and under what circumstances, juveniles are questioned by police and assert or waive these important constitutional rights. In this study we seek to understand the interrogation process from the perspective of law enforcement. Interviews are being conducted with officers in Prince William County, Virginia in an attempt to learn: 1) how frequently juveniles are interrogated and which juveniles are more or less likely to be interrogated, 2) how often juveniles either waive or assert their rights to silence and counsel and 3) what characteristics of the case predict variations in interrogation and rights waiver/assertion.