Children Tried as Adults Essay

Many people have different passions, some might share the same ones while others might have some that no one has heard of before. Mine would have to be anything that had to do with working with kids. I love teaching them, babysitting them, and even playing with them, it's a new and different experience every time. I find it amazing that you could learn more than you think from someone who is 10+ years younger than you. They can teach you the smallest things that you never realized they could. For example how they treat everyday like a new one, they don't focus on the past events from the previous day they always have a fresh look on things; which can be hard to do as you grow older. Children have this energy to them that can’t be found in adults

Garinger was a former juvenile court judge, so Garinger is a very credible source when it comes to the topic of juvenile criminals. To support Garinger’s credible usage of ethos, he demonstrates that in 2005, Supreme Court acknowledged that even though juveniles have committed terrible crimes such as homicide “juvenile offenders cannot with reliability be classified among the worst offenders” (6). This technique of providing the opinions of Supreme Court helps build Garinger’s credibility, and even more so that he is was a former juvenile court judges, so he most likely has a personal relationships with the Supreme Court. Readers feel sympathy to any juvenile who have been charged as adults and been sentenced to life without parole.

Gail Garinger, the author of “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences,” argues that children should not be struck down for life because they commit the most vile and horrible crimes imaginable, based on the sole fact that they are still adolescents, and that they should be given the chance for parole and rehabilitation because they are not fully developed; therefore, in her article she shows exceptionally strong ethos to support her claim. Garinger first exposes her strong ethos by using the authority of the Supreme Court to exclaim why the youth shouldn’t be punished to a life sentence for homicide or manslaughter by saying, “the Supreme Court

Today’s heated debate regarding the decision to try juveniles as adults has prompted individuals to construct opinionated and informational articles on the topic. The nation’s troubled youth are protected by groups that believe these offenders deserve rehabilitation and a chance to develop into a productive member of society. However, others believe that those committing certain heinous crimes should be tried as adults as a means to protect public safety, prevent second offenders, and “dispense justice in the form of punishment” (Aliprandini & Michael, 2016). Because these perspectives offer a reasonable and valid argument, juveniles responsible for major crimes

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

It is understood that at an early age, it is impossible to some advocates, for children to have the mental ability like that of a normal adult, to plan and execute a crime and moreover to understand the consequences of it. Therefore it is controversial where or not to try them as adults. During the adolescent years, it is asserted that a child becomes mature and begins to understand important concepts like society and expectations they are still trying to deal with society, their own inner battles of peer pressure, lack of direction, impulsiveness and lack of identity, according to the Legal and Justice Center. At

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

A surprisingly large majority of young offenders outgrow crime. According to Gail Garinger, a Massachusetts juvenile court judge, “it is impossible at the time of sentencing for mental health professionals to predict which youngsters will fall within that majority and grow up to be productive, law-abiding citizens and which fall into the small minority that continue to commit crimes” (94). Everyone is bound to make poor decisions in their lives. More than the other there are just good people making bad choices. Children should be given the opportunity to demonstrate that they can mature and rehabilitate. They deserve a chance to prove that they can become different people. The best time to decide if someone is deserving of spending most to all of their life in prison is not when they are a child. If placed in juvenile correction systems, teens can be given the support and needed help to change their ways and prove that they will not always be the immature criminal they once

Most children that are ages 16 can be tried as an adult in court, depending on the crime that have committed will determine if it is kept in Juvenile court or transferred to adult court. Some children as early as nine years old have been tried as an adult. Some feel that a child as young as eight have no knowledge or full understanding of what they have done. There are advantages and disadvantages of having a minor hearing in juenville or adult court. The first advantages in adult court, is that the jury might be sympatric to child and seeing the innocence in the child and get him/her the much needed help that they might need.

Kids, we all love them, we want to keep them safe and on the right path in life but what if it’s a child messes up badly, what if they commit a crime? How would you feel about this? What if they get tried as an adult? How would you process that as a parent? How could we have prevented it?

By law adolescents are not able to vote, purchase tobacco or alcohol, join the armed forces, or sign a legal contract. Children are not permitted the same rights and responsibilities as adults because the law recognizes their inability to make adult decisions. The law acknowledges that children are unable to handle the consequences that come along with the rights that adults have. By allowing them to be charged as adults is holding them to a double standard. Telling them that they are not old enough to enjoy the same luxuries as adults, but they can experience the same punishment as adults if they commit a crime. The law acknowledged the inability of children to make decisions but still allows them to suffer the same consequences as adults. Research demonstrates that transferring children from juvenile court to adult court does not decrease recidivism, and in fact actually increases crime. Instead of the child learning their mistake they are more likely to repeat it. Juvenile detention centers have programs that help reconstruct young minds and help them realize where they went wrong. Prison does not offer this same opportunity. (Estudillo, Mary Onelia)

Should juveniles get adult jail sentences? In today's society juvenile offenders are facing the law to full force, in two court systems. Not only are they tried in the juvenile justice system, but also charged as adults. The issue of charging juveniles as adults has stirred various views owing to the violent crimes committed by the young offenders. Politicians comment that the best solution is to lock up juvenile offenders for a long time and ignore rehabilitation. However, prior researches on the topic of juvenile delinquencies suggest that trying young offenders in the adult legal system and putting them in adult prisons will only lead to increased crime, higher costs, and increased violence(John & Jiangmin 568).

Many young adolescents who have committed horrendous crimes have been a huge topic amongst the Supreme Court. Whether young adolescents are viewed as innocent, naive children to the public, this not changed the fact they can commit brutal crimes. In spite of the fact that adolescents have committed brutal crimes such as murder, one needs to understand that their brains are not as fully developed as an adult brain would be. Adolescents should not be trialed to a life sentence or attend adult prisons; however, they should be punished for their actions and undergo rehabilitation programs to help them be prepared to fit in with the rest of society.

I do not think it is a good idea to lock juveniles up in prisons with adults. For a child to set down and plan a murder for instance, there would have to be some kind of deep emotional problem. On the other side of this, if the child knows right from wrong and he can sit down and plan a murder, then you could say if he is old enough to kill someone then he is old enough to die. The juvenile criminal is rooted much deeper than right from wrong. It starts back from when they are small children. Most of them are usually outsiders or outcasts. Who can you hold fault for that other than society? If juveniles don't fit in with the popular kids in school they are considered an

On the other hand, the advocates of the juvenile system believe that because children are not fully mentally or physically developed, they are not therefore accountable for their actions in the same way as adults (Ainsworth, 1995, p.932-933). Juvenile criminality for them is “youthful illness” brought about by external forces like environment or impoverished living conditions. Donna Bishop, an advocate of the juvenile justice system, encourages states to give these juveniles “room to reform.” She believes that a policy that is designed to discard youth in the middle of the transition to adulthood is uncharacteristic of a fair government (Bishop, 2000, p. 159). Supporters of this kind of reform program for juveniles are not amenable to the transfer to adult court