The Role of Neighborhoods Within the Criminal Justice System: Structural Inequities and Sentencing Disparities

• In Event: Cumulative (Dis)advantage, (Dis)trust, and Sanctioning Disparities 2: Ecological Dimensions in European and American Contexts

Abstract

This study examines the impact of the criminal justice system on individuals from Dutch disadvantaged neighborhoods, highlighting factors that contribute to overrepresentation and harsher sentencing outcomes. Forty interviews were conducted with professionals (police officers, prosecutors, lawyers, probation services) and we quantitatively analyzed sanctioning trajectories among all persons suspected of a crime committed in 2014 or 2018.
Findings suggest that individuals from low-income neighborhoods are more likely to enter the justice system. Interviewees consistently identified neighborhood as a significant factor in the criminal justice process, with residents from marginalized areas facing greater police scrutiny, higher arrest rates, and reduced access to quality legal representation. The influence of neighborhood characteristics extends beyond initial contact with the police, affecting case trajectories and sentencing decisions. Youth from these areas are more frequently perceived as high-risk, leading to preventative detention or stricter sentencing under the assumption that their environment lacks protective social structures.
Moreover, disparities in judicial processing arise from differences in social capital and communication styles. Individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds often lack the legal literacy and advocacy networks needed to navigate the system effectively. Prosecutors noted that defendants from these neighborhoods may display behaviors—such as distrust of authorities or reluctance to engage—that are misinterpreted as defiance, further disadvantaging them in legal proceedings. This effect is compounded by cultural norms within certain communities, where interactions with the justice system are shaped by learned behaviors such as maintaining silence or resisting authority.
Additionally, neighborhood-driven disparities intersect with systemic biases in sentencing. Interviewees highlighted that legal professionals may subconsciously assign higher risk to defendants from crime-dense areas, resulting in longer sentences or more punitive interventions. Even in cases where alternatives such as rehabilitation or diversion programs exist, these are less frequently applied to individuals from marginalized communities.

Authors

• Victoria Wozniak-Cole, KU Leuven

• Petra de Jong, Erasmus University Rotterdam