Minors accused of committing serious infractions should be tried as adults and given equal sentences for equal crimes. It does not make sense that a different age would require a different system to prosecute a lawbreaker, minor or not. The design and goals for the Juvenile System is different from our criminal justice system. According to Juvenile vs. Adult Criminal System, it states, “If the juvenile is found to be delinquent, appropriate action in the form of rehabilitation will be taken. In the adult criminal system, action is taken that is intended to punish the defendant”, The approach of an adult court is justice, and giving appropriate consequences for people’s actions. However, the approach of the juvenile court is rehabilitation. If a minor commits a crime that is worthy of a high, deserving sentence, they will not get the appropriate consequence in juvenile court because the focus is to fix their mistakes, and not to punish them reciprocally. …show more content…
The severity of their crimes have almost no impact on the sentence they’re given, and the reason to be that is because others say that “they are too young to understand what they have done is wrong”, but news-flash, if a minor commits a crime that an adult is capable of and shows a lack of empathy of what they have done, they deserve a sentencing that results in lengthy prison time. Thus, juveniles who commit serious crimes should be tried in adult court for this
Juveniles should be tried as adults because they only serve a few years in prison for doing harsh things. Manuel Sanchez and John Duncan committed a bloody murder by shooting a man several times in the chest, and John and Manuel were only twelve years old at the time. For example, “ It was a brutal, callous, bloody murder. But what is even more shocking to people in the small Washington town of Wenatchee is that John Duncan and Manuel Sanchez are only twelve years old.” I found this information in the article “ Rethinking Juvenile Justice” ( John, 1). Instead of the boys
Since the beginning of time justice officials have been faced with a difficult decision should juvenile offenders be given smaller sentences because of their age. Today officials still are having trouble with this situation. Some experts believe some offender should be tried as adults , others believe no juvenile offenders should be tried as adults and some even think all should be tried as adults. My opinion Juvenile criminals the way all offenders should be tried.
Although some people believe that juvenile offenders should be treated like adults and take the same treatment as adults. The sentencing of a juvenile offender should not be tried as an adult, children should not be given the same handling as adults do, adults are different from kids. Adults know how to intake all of the effects of being treated the way they get treated in jail. Children are not capable of the pressure of being treated like adults yet, it also puts a lot of pressure on the juvenile and creates mental breakdowns. This is not right nor fair for children to have to be tried as adults, it is not the same punishments that adults get in jail, it’s more of a harsh and cruel system for adults than for the children to be placed in the facility they are in and get treated like they do.
You did the crime, now you have to do the time. Children all over the world ranging from ages 12-17 who have committed a crime, are all being discussed in the court of law. Should they be tried as adults, or should the court give them leniency and let them serve a shorter sentence with less punishment. Minors should not be tried as adults because of their unstable emotions and their lack of ability to comprehend the difference between right and wrong.
The judiciary system should not make exceptions that surround age, and the reasons being is that the juvenile system holds a belief that juveniles shouldn’t be tried as adults, being due to the brain's development and growth being affected, largely shapes their well-being if their tried as adults. This is an obvious problem, because if minors aren’t tried as an adult, and treated with rehabilitation, it doesn’t fix them as criminals, and allows the juveniles to be repetitive offenders, and if the juvenile system continues to reform offenders crimes, the probability of relapse is taken into place, and the situations that allowed them to not be tried as an adult , arise when they shouldn’t have arisen in the first place, if the juvenile system
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.
Over the last few decades there have been more and more violent crimes committed by children and young adults. Some of these children are under the age of 15, committing violent crimes such as robbery, rape, murder, gang violence. Some of these children are being tried as adults while others are tried and punished as juveniles. A juvenile offender may receive a slap on the wrist being sentenced to house arrest or parole while others are being sent to adult prisons without the possibility of parole. An adult committing these same crimes would receive a more sever sentenced.
The evaluation of success for the purpose of justice is worth seeing the adolescent’s age to be no longer considered a juvenile. Has society dealt with the crime correctly or does the cost for said decision outweigh the punishment the juvenile deserves? Is this the right direction? The struggling issue the legal system is navigating through leads into a decision pointing the said juvenile in the right direction by guidance and education or destroying the juvenile by matching a harsher punishment to a particular crime. In order to make the appropriate decision, a list of “pros” and “cons” would be able to offer some assistance. The “pro” side for a juvenile court system is direction and guidance. This court system sees the lack of maturity and discretion of this youth. This should give cause of seeing the youth as “different” than an adult and should be held less blameworthy for the crime committed. This court’s main objective is to handle the youth through policed courses and correctional involvement for the purpose of rehabilitation. The court focuses on the “age” instead of the “crime.” Transferring to the adult courts, the purpose is to bring harsher sentences for the crime committed as well as the slim chance of “getting off” the hook by attending counseling or other step-process program. Adult courts also see the victims and their families need relief for the crime committed against them. Adult courts do offer the juvenile the majority
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.
When a child is committed of a crime and must undergo punishment through the juvenile system they are being given the punishment with the thought of rehabilitation. As a child the goal for the state is to help them get back on their feet and stop the criminal behavior that is accruing in order to ensure that when they are an adult they will not still be committing these crimes. As soon as a minor has been committed of a crime and arrested for this crime the police submit an application for petition to Probation, probation them looks over the circumstances such as family life, history of crimes, and psychological state before deciding how the case should be handled. (Inside the Juvenile Justice System: 2014) If the case is thought to
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.
No matter their age, when it comes to serious offenses juveniles should be tried as adults because the understanding of what is right and wrong is known by young children, if they have the ability to commit a crime they should be charged as adults, and without them being trying
As more minors are committing violent crimes, the question of whether they should be tried as adults has arisen. Children as young as 13 or 14 are committing violent crimes such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. Some of these children are being tried as adults while others are being tried as juveniles and receiving milder punishments. A juvenile offender may receive a few years in a juvenile detention facility and possibly probation following his release at age eighteen. An adult committing the same violent crime will receive a much harsher penalty, often years in jail, possibly a life sentence, with little or no chance of parole. The only difference between the two offenders is the age at which they committed the crime. Juveniles over
The Juvenile Justice System was created as a separate network from the Criminal Justice System so that juveniles could be treated differently from adults but still be held accountable for their crimes. This system takes more of a rehabilitative approach to help the juvenile offenders rather than to simply punish them because the goal is to keep the youth on the right path and prevent them from becoming lifelong criminals. While the goal remains the same, different states have different laws in place and other methods when it comes to rehabilitation as well as punishment. Punishment for juveniles always sparks debate because many people argue that punishments such as the death penalty and life in prison should not apply to the youth because of their age. Others argue that without this kind of punishment there would be no fear for juveniles in committing serious crimes which would lead to an unfair practice of justice. An unfair practice of justice occurs across the juvenile justice system already in which race, gender, and ethnicity plays a huge role in determining how far into the system a youth goes. Changes have to be made to this system in order for improvement to be seen but it has to start from the beginning where the juveniles first come into contact with the 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