Adult Criminal Justice System

Some juvenile delinquents are being treated like adults and being sent to adult prisons instead of juvenile prisons. In an article called “ADULT PRISONS: No Place for Kids,” by Steven J. Smith, Smith presents an argument against treating juveniles like adults. His argument states that minors shouldn’t be trialed and placed into adult prisons because instead of being rehabilitated, they typically come out worse because of the daily exposure to already hardened criminals. Smith provides reasons why juveniles are convicted as adults, the drawbacks of placing adolescents in prisons with adults, and an alternative punishment for juvenile criminals.

There are times juveniles should not be convicted as adults because sometimes the “crimes” may not harsh enough to be charged as an adult. For example, if a 8 year old saw a gun in their mother's purse and thought it was a toy and grabbed it and began to shoot who would be at fault ? Plus children in adult prisons are 10 times more likely to be taken advantage of in their time. Research shows that children prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system are more likely to reoffend than those held in the juvenile justice

Michele Deith said “Children brains are still under developed, then why tired them as an adult in court”. A child being tried as an adult effect their lives in many ways. The message of loss hope builds up in their minds prompting the idea that they can’t make mistakes. Because they fear they will always be tired unfairly. Also, being in prison for a life time for an ignorant mistake will make them more likely to commit more crimes. Crime records as a juvenile holds less than an adult record. Majority of juvenile cases are only classified as minor offensives. While, some cases may be different because of the crime, children should still be recognized for learning and should be held responsible however, not on an adult level.

There are times where a juvenile may be eligible for transfer to adult criminal court. There are certain criteria that must be met for this to happen, and there is a strong belief that juveniles who commit serious offenses would be more appropriately dealt with by criminal (or adult) courts (Elrod & Ryder, 2011). Juveniles are capable of committing the same serious offenses that adults do. Therefore, with the requirements of a transfer being met, there are times that juveniles should be placed in the adult criminal court system and tried through here, rather than the juvenile court system. The juvenile court system may not have the same consequences or sentencing guidelines as the adult criminal court; therefore, the proper punishment may

Many of these juveniles lack the maturity to handle situations such as adult prisons. Most of the children who are tried as adults lose hope for their future and no hope for them to ever become anything but a criminal. Judges in juvenile courts have the power to impose curfews, house arrest and counseling to offenders rather than send them straight to jail. Juveniles are impressionable and likely to end up becoming involved in a gang or other crime activities when they are locked up with

Minors that do serious crimes, like assault or drug trafficking, shouldn’t be charged as adults. Some people say,”Old enough to do the crime, old enough to do the time”,but sending them to an actual adult jail, will make them much more worse, rather then giving them the help they need. According to the Centres for Disease Control, young people who are charged as adults are nearly 35% likelier to be rearrested than those who are tried as juveniles. Minors tried as juveniles are less likely to be rearrested because, they get the help they need. The minors in a juvenile facility receive counseling and other support they need to turn their life around. From The New York Times Upfront magazine, a 17 year old who was charged for attempt of murder was send to a juvenile facility and really turned his life around, having a bachelor’s degree and planning to graduate high school.

Juveniles can be sentenced for periods of time so long it usually prohibits them from many things they could or hoped to accomplish in their lifetime, such as getting married, having children , possibly joining the military, etc. “The determination whether a young person is prosecuted in juvenile court or in the adult criminal court is at its core a question about punishment” ( Vaughan 1 ). Young juveniles could have possibly just been in the wrong place at the wrong time when a crime is committed so therefore they could end up being punished as an adult if the court decides that. Kids that are associated to a crime and put in jail sometimes should maybe be given a second chance or have their part in the case looked at differently depending on the role they played in the crime that was

At the end of the 19th Century, the U.S. made legal history when the world's first juvenile court opened in Chicago(Horwitz-Prisco). The court was founded on two basic principles. First, juveniles lacked the maturity to take responsibility for their actions the way adults could. Second, because their character was not yet fully developed, they could be rehabilitated more successfully than adult criminals. More than a century later, these principles remain the benchmarks of juvenile justice in the United States(Horowitz-Prisco).In recent years, however, a growing number of juvenile criminals are being tried as adults. In part this stems from public outrage against children who are committing violent crimes. Many young children in America are

Many of these juveniles are the ones forming gangs. They also the ones drug dealing,enacted in robberies and are mostly like to be the ones committing murders. Therefore if they were to be tried as as adults and put in adult prisons, they would probably think more seriously about their acts and next time think twice of what they are going to do.

Whether or not we should try juveniles as adults has always been a controversial issue. First of all, “juveniles” are children who fall under the age of 18. However, the legal age varies within certain states across the USA. Despite the age difference, some juveniles are still tried as adults. Does convicting a juvenile as an adult, turn out to be a better problem-solver, and how is this affecting the deterrence of crime?

Imagine sitting in a courtroom, hoping the the judge will not give a harsh sentence. Unfortunately, that’s the case for many juveniles, some as young as 13! A juvenile is subject to a more severe sentence with the limited sentencing available. It is estimated that 250,000 youth are prosecuted as adults, each year. This number should change, as juveniles are not adults, both mentally and physically. Juveniles need an environment surrounded with guiding adults, education and the resources to help them. A juvenile is not an adult, and should not be tried as one.

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

The dilemma of whether or not to transfer juveniles to adult court has been a major topic, for many years, in the United States. Since 1899, judges have had the option to transfer juveniles to adult court. The major factor for transferring juveniles to adult court since then has been the seriousness of the offense. That being said, juveniles only make up a small portion of violent crimes in the United States. Only 16 percent of juvenile offenders in 2008 were arrested for violent crimes (Champion,2008). The problem is the determination of whether the crime is serious enough to be waived and transferred to adult court. Almost every state has statutory judicial waiver provisions, which grant juvenile judges the authority to transfer

With the escalation of murders and rapes committed by minors as seen in recent years the people are looking for the right answer. Public concern over the effectiveness of the juvenile courts when dealing with these offenders has brought about change in the justice system. (Stolba, 2001). The courts now, are quicker to transfer a juveniles’ case to adult court than when the juvenile system was first formed. There stands a conflict of interests within the two court systems. Juvenile courts are to protect the rights of youths determined incapable of adult decisions. The primary concern is that the youth be rehabilitated and not become a repeat offender. Thus, protecting the child from incarceration with adult criminals and any possible future victims. The concerns of the adult court is to make sure the convicted offender pays for their crime and that the victim gets justice. Rehabilitation is not a primary concer of the adult justice system.

As a contrast, there are many differences between the adult and juvenile justice system. These differences consist of the right to a jury, the right to post bail, leniency of evidence, different court proceedings, the right to a public trial, and rehabilitation efforts. As for the purpose of this paper, we will dissect the differences of the two systems. Many appeals have been filed under the notion that a right to a jury should be upheld for juvenile offenders. The courts have voted against this action time and time again. These appeals are made on the assumption that, as noted earlier, adult crimes should be tried as adult crimes. However, the court rules on this matter while keeping the rehabilitation efforts of the juvenile courts in mind, as opposed to the more punitive measures. Their desire to see kids treated as kids are defined with their upholding of the law, and pushing rehabilitation to its max. But should rehabilitation be the prime focus when the act is of adult capacity; even in a child’s body? I do not think so. What are the percentages of rehabilitation success with adults for committed capital offenses? How are they going to differ when a child partakes in them? I think there is a