No Matter How Loud I Shout

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?

Juveniles should be tried as adults when they commit serious crimes as opposed to rehabilitation or various forms of lesser sentencing. The rate of juveniles in prison has increased over the years. Many young adults and children often seek for attention which leads them to cause trouble out in the streets. There are risk levels that officers have to make in order to help the juveniles or if committing a serious crime, they should pay the consequences. Many may oppose and think that young adults and children are not adults, but they should be punished for the crimes they have done.

In conclusion I feel that by not trying juveniles as adults it is a better outcome for the child and society. We are also giving the juvenile a second chance at the future that everyone

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

The juvenile justice system is a foundation in society that is granted certain powers and responsibilities. It faces several different tasks, among the most important is maintaining order and preserving constitutional rights. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with committing a crime there are many different factors that will come in to play during the course of his arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, and rehabilitation process. This paper examines the Juvenile Justice System’s court process in the State of New Jersey and the State of California.

It has been one hundred years since the creation of the juvenile court in the United States. The court and the juvenile justice system has made some positive changes in the lives of millions of young people lives over the course or those years, within the last thirteen years there has been some daunting challenges in the system.

Beginning in the 1960s, the US Supreme Court decided on a succession of landmark cases that histrionically altered the processes and all around atmosphere of the Juvenile Justice System in America. One case in particular that played a major role in the Juvenile field is Kent vs. US (383 US. 541 [1966]). The landmark case Kent vs. United States, observed as the first chief juvenile rights case in our history. This important case established the collective standards that entitled juveniles the right to waivers and preliminary hearings, which ensured due process was served. This would ultimately decide if the court would shift Kent into adult jurisdiction or allow him to remain in the juvenile system.

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.

What judgment should be used to best serve the needs of both the public and the juveniles, and who to place it upon. Judges like Roosevelt Dorn, who frequently showed his contempt of the current juvenile justice methods, but was the best advocate for the treatment of the children. I think his method is one of the best ways to reform the system through early prevention and more rehabilitation. The district attorney’s office was often prosecuting on the word of often subpar investigations and evidence, due to a lack of funding. The adult court transfers are not the most effective way to reduce more juvenile crimes, although for extreme delinquents I think it is the best way to sentence them. The transfers do not do anything to prevent more crime; they just reduce some of the workload of the overloaded juvenile system.

There are many similarities and differences between the adult and juvenile justice systems. Although juvenile crimes have increased in violence and intensity in the last decade, there is still enough difference between the two legal proceedings, and the behaviors themselves, to keep the systems separated. There is room for changes in each structure. However, we cannot treat/punish juvenile offenders the way we do adult offenders, and vice versa. This much we know. So we have to find a way to merge between the two. And, let’s face it; our juveniles are more important to us in the justice system. They are the group at they

Humes, E. (1996). No matter how loud I shout: A year in the life of juvenile court. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

This paper takes a brief look at the history and evolution of the juvenile justice system in the United States. In recent years there has been an increase of juvenile cases being transferred into the adult court system. This paper will also look at that process and the consequences of that trend.

Tried as an Adult, Housed as a Juvenile: A Tale of Youth From Two Courts Incarcerated Together

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.

In my own opinion, I consider juveniles as immature because they lack the ability to recognize the long term impact of their actions as they have decreased levels of responsibility. Therefore, the justice system should not charge juveniles in adult legal system and sentence them as adults.Trying juveniles as adults exposes the young offenders to state penitentiaries up to life in prison without parole and even sentenced to death. This raises a question on how truly effective treating juveniles as adults are to the young offenders. As the crimes committed by juveniles increase, there has been an outcry from the public and affected to prosecute juveniles accused of serious crimes as adults. It is true that juveniles do