preview

Juvenile Justice System Reflection

Decent Essays

To begin I learned a lot of new information in Unit nine. I have taken law classes before in high school but was never too familiar with the juvenile justice system. The first fact I learned was that a juvenile case never goes in front of a jury. The judge always hears the case and decides a ruling a punishment. I believe that is a good system. I enjoy the system because as Dr. McCarty pointed out a jury is supposed to be a group made of people who could be considered the suspects “peers.” In a juvenile case a jury of minors can’t be called in for obvious reasons such as a group of 13-year old’s can’t decide the legal fate of a suspect. The other point I drew from that is having a group of adults preside as a jury similar to an adult case can prove to be unfair. I thought this because adults can’t be considered a juvenile’s peers. A common thought I had was a 40-year-old adult may be basing their decision on their own history and things have changed drastically in the world since a 40-year-old was considered a juvenile. Having older jurors in my opinion would only create havoc for the defendant and most likely would harm them in an unnecessary way. I agree with the current system that for all juvenile cases a judge has to preside over the case as a judge has to be neutral and open minded throughout any trial. Even though a minor’s fate essentially comes down to one person’s decision it is the right system. There are far too many cons to bringing in juries for

Get Access