I agree that the teen court is an interesting concept. I'm glad you mentioned students feeling more comfortable talking to their peers rather than having to talk to administration because I didn't think of it, and I agree completely. I think it is a strong advantage of the teen court. The peers may be able to understand why the student is acting out and breaking rules more than the administration can. I feel that the positive reinforcement is a very effective way to reward students when have good behavior. After school detention and Saturday school is a better punishment because it keeps the students in the classroom, but it shows them that their actions do have consequences. Some students may enjoy being suspended depend on how much they
Placing a juvenile in a detention center early in the court process increases the risk that youths will be found to be delinquent and damage their prospects for future success. A majority of the youths that are placed in these facilities pose little or no threat to the public and essentially do not need to be there. This portion of the juvenile court process is detrimental to the future and mental aspects of a youth’s life. We desperately need to change the way that we handle the juvenile court system because we are only reinforcing the delinquent behavior that these youths have been exposed to. We need to focus on the rehabilitation and prevention efforts for these youths not the punishment aspect and until then (insert a better ending).
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.
How would you feel if the police arrested kids all over our country to jail for just crossing the street the wrong way or pushing another kid on the playground? That is what is happening to many underage juvenile all over the United States; they are being sent to adult prisons for crimes that do not deserve such severe punishments. Why they were tried as adults is an enigma and we will explain why this is a terrible injustice. In 1899 children in between the ages of 7-14 were believed they were incapable of committing criminal intent. The court system back then believed that if enough evidence could be gathered to convince a jury, the underage person would be convicted and sent to an adult prison. Currently in our state, persons as
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.
Today’s juvenile court system handles most cases involving those under the age of 18-year-old. This was not always the case and the ideal of a separate court system for adults and children is only about 100 years old. When looking at the differences that set juvenile courts apart, it is important to study the history and see how it developed over time.
take some time in order to make the proper decision. There are a few different ways
Juveniles committing crimes is not a new issued being introduced to society; actually, it has been an issue for centuries. However, the big question is, should juveniles be tried in adult courts? Before answering, take into consideration every possible scenario that could have led them to commit the crime. For instance, were they the leader in the act? Did they participate in the crime? Was the juvenile even aware of what was taking place? Were they peer pressured? Did they have any other choice at the time? There are so many other questions we could consider when making a decision here.
There is a purpose for the court, and different types of courts. For example, there is a purpose, and a scope with in the juvenile court (Cox, Allen, Hanser, & Conrad, 2014). This just means that each state will customize what their needs are for juvenile court (Cox et al, 2014). This can be a good or bad thing within the system. Furthermore, there has to be a purpose for the court. This is short means the cases they will be hearing. This could mean abuse, delinquency, or family issues (Cox et al, 2014).
“It helped me realize I was not around the right crowd and got me on the right path for my future,” states Emmalyne Sheridan, a current WVU freshman and experiencer of the teen court process. Teen courts are legally binding, sentence based courts for first time low-level juvenile offenders that aim to build character instead of issuing punishments. These courts consist of juveniles holding positions such as clerk, prosecuting and defence attorneys, bailiff, and the jury. The entire process is completed with little adult involvement resulting in an almost completely teen run system. Some may argue that these programs are useless and just delay the process of actual teen reformation, but this is not the case. Teen court programs should be established and utilized in all jurisdictions because of their use of reform over punishment, influence, and establishment of a future pathway.
When thinking of reforming the juvenile justice system one has to think; what can we do to make this better for everyone involve? There are some programs that can be implemented when trying to make a change in the juvenile system. The main thing is getting parents or the guardian more involved in the child’s whereabouts. Secondly the community where the youth will have a place to go and have something more constructive to do to keep them out of trouble. Law enforcement can get involved in giving ride along and having visits to the local jails or prisons from the youth to talk to some of the inmates. Crime in life isn’t racist at all it has a no age limit, no certain gender and no social status for most of those whom decide to partake in a criminal activity. From the beginning juveniles have been an issue with law enforcement, the question has always arisen of whom will take control without cruel and unusual punishment and assist with the rehabilitation and prevention future crime actions.
The Juvenile Court system was a system set up to deal with minors who find themselves in
after being charged with the rape and beating of a twenty eight year old woman who was jogging in Central Park in New York around 1989. They were interrogated using the Reid technique, all being minors, with no legal counsel present, and after being held for thirty hours in a small, and dim interrogation room. Pressured, intimidated, and exhausted the young teens confessed and were found guilty sentence to forty-one years in prison for a crime they did not commit. Victims or racial conflicts in the 1990 law enforcement, judges, and jury were fast to sentence them and jailed without any proper evidence allowed in the hearing. They were sentenced as adults, being adolescent, becoming nervous by being in jail, and intimidated by police; they
The juvenile justice system is always changing and developing new ideas. The first example of a change or development can be the status offense reform. The basis of this are they are trying to keep the non-delinquent kids form the juvenile justice system. Some examples of status offenses are skipping school, or running away – offenses that are not illegal for adults. These offenses can lead to possibly detention, which might do very little to rehabilitate or change the issues that juvenile has. How this can all change is to bring these troubled kids to community based services to make them learn that it is possible to change and become a better person. Some other examples of changes or developments in our juvenile justice system (that I won’t go into detail about) are the quality of aftercare and how the system is trying to reduce racial-ethnic discrepancies and making it fairer for everyone (models for change).
Unfortunately, the court system fails to acknowledge the fact that there may be other serious contributing factors in their actions. For example, an adolescent’s brain isn’t fully developed; which causes them to act immature. At these ages, teenagers aren't fully capable of understanding right from wrong and are prone to making misguided judgements in their actions. According to the article, “Startling Finds on Teenagers Brains”, during the teenage years the brain inhibits a developing stage, therefore, causes a substantial loss in brain tissue which controls impulses (Thompson par. 7). This explains their mentality and emotional behavior that most likely leads to erratic compulsions. Moreover, the court system should take into consideration
Serious crimes such as murder, burglary and rape have raised questions as to whether the young offenders should face severe punitive treatment or the normal punitive measures in juvenile courts. Many would prefer the juveniles given harsh punishment in order to discourage other young people from engaging in similar activities and to serve as a lesson to these particular offenders. However, results from previous studies indicate such punitive measures were neither successful nor morally acceptable. Instead, the solutions achieved have unfairly treated the youths and compromised the society status (Kristin, page 1).