Prosecuting Juveniles As Adults in The Criminal Justice System

There are many similarities and differences in the juvenile and adult justice systems. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with a crime there are many factors that play a role out during the course of an arrest, trail, conviction and sentencing. Years ago all criminals were tried as adults and there was no distinction made between adult and juvenile. Currently, the law has come to realize the need to categorize the two as they are two different populations with very different physical and psychological needs needs. According to Bartol, “juveniles, like adults, also may be provided with intermediate sanctions, which are less restrictive than residential placement but more restrictive than the standard probation under which the juvenile remains in his or her own home with conditions attached” (Bartol, 2011) very similar to adult offenders.

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.

There is much debate over whether or not juveniles should ever be tried as adults. Juveniles are defined as children under the age of 18. In the past, juveniles have been tried in a separate juvenile court because of their age. However, trying juveniles as adults for violent crimes is a trend that is on the rise. Age is supposed to be a deterrent for placing those under 18 on trial and giving them stiffer punishments that are often reserved for adults. Many debate whether or not juveniles really should have less severe punishments or if trying some juveniles as adults will lower juvenile crime rates.

“I think it's important for us as a society to remember that the youth within juvenile justice systems are, most of the time, youths who simply haven't had the right mentors and supporters around them because of circumstances beyond their control,” (qtd. in Brainy Quotes) are wise words from Q'orianka Kilcher, a human rights activist. Many Americans feel adolescents should be held accountable for their behavior; however, trying them as if they are adults is not always the optimum course of action. Because the teenage brain matures from back to front, the prefrontal cortex is not established until mid-twenties. Ordinarily adolescents can be rehabilitated in order to avert future offending; yet when tried as an adult, all hope for rehabilitation is lost. A one time mistake will follow an adolescent around for the rest of his/her life, dramatically decreasing the opportunities for success. Trying adolescents as adults is an injustice due to their lack of rationality and potential for rehabilitation.

This paper is an attempt to understand and point out the flaws in the legal system that has of late in many cases begun to treat juveniles in the same footing as adult offenders. There is a raging controversy over this move that makes young offenders to be tried and incarcerated just as if the crime was done by an adult. The arguments over this have been made in the Supreme Court and the land mark judgement Roper Vs Simmons (1995). However it is submitted that simple observations of the post procedure effects on young persons have not been verified or recorded properly. If this system continues, would it not be against the logic of creating the juvenile justice system

Juvenile delinquency has become a controversial issue within the Criminal Justice system. In the United States, juvenile delinquency refers to disruptive and criminal behavior committed by an individual under the age of 18. In many states, a minor at the age of 16 to 17 ½ can be tried as an adult. Once the individual reaches adulthood, the disruptive and criminal behavior is recognized as a crime. However, the criminal justice system has divided juvenile delinquency into two general types of categories that has brought upon controversial issues of inequality and corruption. Yet, putting young individuals in juvenile detentions facilities seems to open the door for them to commit more crimes in the future. Therefore, under certain circumstances juveniles should be tried as an adult.

There are significant differences between the juvenile and adult criminal court system. For example, "in the adult system, the goal is to punish. In the juvenile system, on the other hand, the goal is to rehabilitate and serve the minor's best interest. Juvenile courts are often more informal than those for adults. For example, rules about the admissibility of evidence may be more lenient," according to legalmatch.com.

However, as previously stated, these juveniles are at the same time being faced with factors that could greatly influence their actions. “After a series of other crimes, he planned the murdered for months, carefully and privately. He did not act on impulse or because of peer pressure. He was not mentally disabled - in fact he was quite intelligent” (Jenkins, p.). Although in this case, the suspect said he was aware of what he was doing, doesn’t mean he may not have been influenced into doing so.

In the last 42 years little to no changes have been made to correct the standards that govern punitive measures towards juvenile delinquency. Today juvenile law is governed by state and many states have enacted a juvenile code. However, in numerous cases, juveniles are transferred to adult court when juvenile courts waive or relinquish jurisdiction. Adolescents should not be tried in the adult court system or sentenced to adult penitentiary's on account of: teen brains are not mature which causes a lack of understanding towards the system, incarceration in an adult facility increases juvenile crime, and children that are sentenced to adult prison are vulnerable to abuse and rape.

According to research, "[There is a massive loss,] gray matter, which brain researchers believe supports all our thinking and emotions, is purged at a rate of 1 percent to 2 percent a year during this period.... These frontal lobes, which inhibit our violent passions, rash actions, and regulate our emotions, are vastly immature throughout the teenage years (Thompson, 7)." This means that scientifically, only stating facts, juveniles are not ready to be equal to adults. Similar questions arose in Marjie Lundstrom's article, "Kids Are Kids- Until They Commit Crimes." Lundstrom states how ironic it is that society perceives juvenile-aged children as such immature and untrustworthy human beings until they commit crimes (Lundstrom, 3). Suddenly, their rights as kids are taken away and they are left to be fully responsible for their actions, which they were never used to doing. They suddenly lose their rights to be protected by their parents and they are put in a situation where they cannot support themselves, they have no experience being self- reliant, but they have to

The juvenile law in America’s system was created on the premise that due to young people’s immaturity, the crimes they have committed should be handled in a different manner from those ascribed to adults. The young people were mostly under the age of eighteen. The key basis was to address the cause of their misdemeanors and to ultimately restore their responsible membership within the community (Bernard, 2012). Juvenile courts date back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In the United States, juvenile courts vary in structure and organization, but all serve the common goal of rehabilitating young people.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the long-term negative consequences young African Americans face after being tried as adults in the justice system. This research is intended to find means of reducing the number of minority juveniles tried as adults by bringing awareness to local communities on how the juvenile justice system works. It is important to explore the history of juvenile justice systems, as well as the particular cases of individuals who have experienced being placed in an adult jail systems. The research will mainly focus on North Carolina. This is because there has been a recent bill put into place by the North Carolina General Assembly, which seeks to raise the age of juvenile jurisdiction. This means that youth aged

Over the past several decades more adolescences are being arrested and prosecuted. Not only are more children being put the juvenile justice system younger and younger children are being tried as adults. In more recent years thousand of adolescences are being placed in adult court systems and sentencing them to longer and harsher punishments. Although crime has gone down significantly in America the number of juvenile offenders has increased greatly. Many people in our society today believe that children who commit violent crimes should be tried in the adult court system even though they are under the age of eighteen. Although these children committed crimes such as an adult, this does not mean they are adults and should be sentenced as one.

The nation’s first juvenile court was established in 1899 as a part of the Juvenile Court Act. It was founded on three principles: juveniles are not ready to be held accountable for their actions, are not yet fully developed, and can rehabilitate easier than adults. In all but three states, anyone charged with committing a criminal act before his or her eighteenth birthday is considered a juvenile offender. Now more than ever, states and countries have begun to question the reliability of the juvenile court. Some believe the juvenile court system should be abolished because of its insufficient gain to the community. Others believe children are not fully capable to understand the degree of their actions and the consequences that come from them and believe that juvenile courts are a necessity in the court system.

The juvenile justice system was founded on the belief that children are different from adults; therefore, the justice system and corrections sanctions for juveniles should acknowledge the differences. “Rising juvenile crime rates during the 1970s and 1980s spurred state legislatures across the country to exclude or transfer a significant share of offenders under the age of eighteen to the jurisdiction of the criminal court” (Fagan, 2008). The acknowledgement of these differences should be the bases for a proper juvenile justice system. The examination of the juvenile justice’s systems history, trends, and causation theories will provide an insight into the future of the juvenile justice system.