Crown selected youth diversion has received little academic attention in Canada. As a process that channels offenders out of the formal legal system, diversion purports to achieve contradictory self-serving system and offender-based goals. Using 50 randomly selected prosecution files – half of which the Crown diverted and half of which the Crown prosecuted – a mixed method investigation of diversion assesses cases through quantitative content analysis and grounded theory method. Based on the quantitative analysis, it is argued that there is an emerging patterned nature of Crown selected diversion that is not completely benign. This patterned nature of diversion unearths a distinctive discourse of diversion/non-diversion. Qualitatively, it is argued that the cases are organized around three temporal moments that create an area for distinctions to be made in terms of threat, responsibility, (in)tolerableness and recourse. Seemingly, there is a persistent paradoxical existence of the diversion process that emerges from the case files.

Crown selected youth diversion has received little academic attention in Canada. As a process that channels offenders out of the formal legal system, diversion purports to achieve contradictory self-serving system and offender-based goals. Using 50 randomly selected prosecution files – half of which the Crown diverted and half of which the Crown prosecuted – a mixed method investigation of diversion assesses cases through quantitative content analysis and grounded theory method. Based on the quantitative analysis, it is argued that there is an emerging patterned nature of Crown selected diversion that is not completely benign. This patterned nature of diversion unearths a distinctive discourse of diversion/non-diversion. Qualitatively, it is argued that the cases are organized around three temporal moments that create an area for distinctions to be made in terms of threat, responsibility, (in)tolerableness and recourse. Seemingly, there is a persistent paradoxical existence of the diversion process that emerges from the case files.

Crown selected youth diversion has received little academic attention in Canada. As a process that channels offenders out of the formal legal system, diversion purports to achieve contradictory self-serving system and offender-based goals. Using 50 randomly selected prosecution files – half of which the Crown diverted and half of which the Crown prosecuted – a mixed method investigation of diversion assesses cases through quantitative content analysis and grounded theory method. Based on the quantitative analysis, it is argued that there is an emerging patterned nature of Crown selected diversion that is not completely benign. This patterned nature of diversion unearths a distinctive discourse of diversion/non-diversion. Qualitatively, it is argued that the cases are organized around three temporal moments that create an area for distinctions to be made in terms of threat, responsibility, (in)tolerableness and recourse. Seemingly, there is a persistent paradoxical existence of the diversion process that emerges from the case files.