Case Study Lionel Tate

Prison is a place where the criminal justice system put its entire hopes. The correctional

On January 26, 2001, 13-year-old Lionel Tate was convicted in the first-degree murder of Tiffany Eunick. The incident occurred in July of 1999 in Pembroke Park, Florida. Tate, then twelve, claimed he was imitating pro wrestlers when he killed six-year-old Eunick. He claimed to have picked the girl up and accidentally thrown her into a stair handrail and wall while trying to throw her onto a sofa. Experts all agreed that Eunick was beaten for a period of time. The autopsy report showed that the girl suffered a fractured skull, lacerated liver, broken rib, internal hemorrhaging, and cuts and bruises. One expert said her injuries were comparable to falling from a

By the lack of rehabilitation programs in the state and federal prison systems, the chances of convicts releasing and returning back to prison increases rapidly. The lack of rehabilitation is one of the most leading causes to an offenders relapse or to a new crime that will be committed within 3 years from the offender’s release. A rehabilitation program

Rehabilitation for at risk teens has been an ongoing issue that runs deep in certain communities. When kids at young ages are exposed to stress and have to cope early on with dysfunction they are denied the opportunity to mature and conditioned to commit thinking errors that perpetuate a young offender into an adult offender. To find ways to break this cycle John Hubner accounts his time on the Giddings State School Capital Offenders Program and how a group of counselors are able to combine many strategies in rehabilitating young offenders who have committed serious crimes. Young people convicted of serious crimes are often transferred to adult prisons that institutionalize young people to prison life only increasing the likely hood of

Juvenile delinquency is a relatively new phenomenon. For this reason, society’s reactions and solutions to the problem of delinquency are also modern developments. The United States developed the first youth court in 1899 and is now home to many new and formerly untested methods of juvenile rehabilitation and correction. One of many unique programs within the Juvenile Justice system, boot camps are institutions designed to keep delinquent juveniles out of traditional incarceration facilities and still provide a structured method of punishment and rehabilitation. Boot camps developed in the early 1990s and quickly proliferated throughout the nation. Specifically, they are “…short-term residential programs modeled after

In class we also discussed the recidivism statistics for these habitually violent juveniles who have determinate sentences and were released from TYC. For more than 50 percent of the juveniles released from TYC reoffend for at least one felony. Had these juveniles been tried as adults and received more severe sentences, their felonies could have been avoided. Although the methods used by the staff in the Hubner book seemed to make a difference while the juveniles were there, once they left, it didn’t appear that it made a difference at all. Many of the juveniles were able to stay out of trouble for about a year, but they recommitted afterwards.

In order to properly address mandatory incarceration for chronic juvenile offender’s criminal activities, it is important to begin with psychological assessments and evaluations. Half of our youths have experienced some type of psychological trauma such as depression, PTSD, personality disorders, anxiety, anger issues, or dissociation, just to name a few (Moroz, K. 2009). In order to determine mandatory incarceration, all of these factors must be considered. I will agree with most of our society that is , if they are a danger to society and serious of the crime, they need to be put into detention, where they cannot cause harm but where they can received the right intervention program and mental health treatment for them, it’s the law. The juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate not punish young offenders. Punishment is not the answer in solving their delinquent behavioral patterns.

To examine current treatments, firstly, seeing the re-offenders rate is helpful. Although the re-offenders rate of juvenile offenders are not calculated nationally, according to 2010 Juvenile justice Outcome Evaluation Report (2010) by California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation (CDCR) in California, State-level incarceration recidivism rate of minors released in fiscal year 2004 to 2005 is 56.5 percent. 56.5 percent of released juvenile offenders returned to incarceration within 3 years. Also 81.1 percent of minors leased in fiscal 2004 to 2005 were rearrested. 2012 Outcome Evaluation Report (2012) by CDCR shows 25.4 percent of juvenile offenders who released from Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) in 2007 to 2008 returned to Division of Adult institutions (DAI). From 2010 to 2012, the rate had decreased more than half. However, in 2010 to 2012, still one of every four juvenile offenders commit a crime again. The expectable recidivism rate can be considered as a large number. The higher

Correctional treatment programs have long been thought not to be effective in lowering the recidivism among criminals; Martinson (1979). Researchers have done countless studies and surveys only to find out that many of these studies and programs work and nearly the same number of programs do not work, depending on what component was or was not a part of the studies. Knowing that all programs does not work for all criminals is a no brainer, however, finding a good mixture of what does work and for what percentage of criminals is a beginning to duplicate that program with a few minor adjustments in the programs.

Discussed earlier was the idea of rehabilitating youths in reformatories at the House of Refuge, but only youths deemed reformable (Fox, 1996). What about the youth who were not reformable? What about the youth that commit a serious violent offense such as murder, rape, torture, or armed robbery? In the 1980’s during the “get tough” on juvenile crime movement, states passed waiver legislation that allowed for the transfers of youths to adult court (Kupchik, 2003). Not only has there been no significant findings that trying juveniles as adult does not lower the potential for recidivism, but it has not been found to be an effective means of crime control (Fagan, 2008). Although being tried as an adult opened up even more constitutional safeguards than had been provided post-Gault, the transfer of juveniles to adult court went against the moral notion of keeping youths out of court and out of the system (McGowan, A., Hahn, R., Liberman, A., Crosby, A., Fullilove, M., Johnson, R., … Stone, G., 2007). How does the juvenile justice system, after years of reform and change get back to being a therapeutic and focused on individualized justice? Is it possible?

If a juvenile is not deemed restorable or restorable within the designated time-frame as applied in some states, the charges (delinquency or criminal) against the juvenile must be dismissed and court proceedings terminated. If restorable then a court order remediation plan is produced to meet the individual’s concern surrounding competency and restoration services put in place. Clinical factors associated with restoration outcomes or predictability of restoration are age and gender demographically and no legal factors have consistently been predictive of restorability (Gay, Vitacco, & Ragatz, 2017, p.g. 299). In advisement of restoration planning considerations must be given to the developmental and mental health histories of the juvenile, current mental status, pharmacological, therapeutic and educational responses to therapies and interventions (Grisso, 2005, p.g. 189); and determination of what deficits can be remediated, what interventions can remediate the deficit, where and how can the appropriate remediations be accessed, and how long would successful remediation take? The utilization of out-patient treatment programs and in-patient hospitalizations and residential treatment are often utilized for remediation but must be appropriate to both provide youth services and provide public protection and safety. However, this should

Lionel was convicted of the murder of 6-year-old Tiffany Eunick. Lionel argued that Tiffany’s death was a mistake and that he was only repeating a move that he saw a professional wrestler perform. However, experts say that Lionel’s story did not answer for all of the injuries that Tiffany obtained the night that she died. “The defense’s own experts conceded that Tate’s story would not have accounted for all of Tiffany’s injuries, which one prosecution expert said were comparable to falling from a three-story building.” (““Wresting” Case Draws,” par. 20) It is obvious that Lionel did not tell everything that happened on the night that he killed Tiffany, and some could say that they would expect Lionel to hide the entire truth because he was young and scared, but then they are presented with details of his actions after being confronted with what happened to Tiffany. “Ms. Eunick- Paul testified that when she told Lionel that her daughter was dead, he shrugged and rolled his eyes. The next day, he asked Ms. Eunick- Paul if he could live with her and have Tiffany’s toys, she testified.” (Canedy, par. 11) 12 Year Old Lionel Tate was not able to sympathize the death of 6 year old Tiffany Eunick. How could life in prison without mental help, help Lionel Tate? How could life in prison help 13-year-old Eric Smith who committed murder on a spur- of- the- moment

The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.

Currently to deal with juvenile offenders involved in the youth crime, there are two options available. The first option that prevails to a larger extent is known to us as incarceration while the second option that is slowly gaining trends is known to us as rehabilitation programs. This paper focuses on thorough analysis of both these options and the impact that they have on the offenders as well as the society as a whole. The paper also assesses the viability of these options in order to determine which of these will prove to be more effective and beneficial.

Finally, literature on the juvenile justice system often focuses on program implementation and effectiveness at addressing rehabilitation, as well as diversion techniques within the system (Greenwood, 2008). This review audits these problems in detail and establishes them within the bigger struggle in the juvenile justice system to rehabilitate youth offenders.