The Effects Of Charging Juveniles Of Adults

The cases of Lionel Tate, and brothers Derek and Alex King bring into focus the problems that society has in addressing how to handle criminal cases involving deadly violence by under-age juveniles. Lionel Tate, a 12 year old in Florida was convicted of killing a 6-year-old playmate while Alex and Derek King, 12 and 13 years old respectively, were convicted of killing their father. Interestingly, Lionel Tate, who happens to be black, was sentenced to life in prison while the King boys, who are white, both received minimal terms.

The juvenile court system was established in the United States over more than a century ago, with the first court appearing in Illinois in 1899. Prior to that time, children and youth were seen as small adults with that the youth were tried and punished as adults.

“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.

June 25th 2012, The Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who commit murder could not be sentenced to life in prison or in other words juveniles could not be sentenced as an adult would be. The Supreme Court brought forth that sentencing juveniles to life in prison transgresses the eighth amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. How is a 17 year old criminal different from an 18 year old criminal who both commit a murder crime? Apparently the age creates a significant difference according to the Supreme Court. Maturity and Development of people under 18 are clear incentives that support the decision made by the Supreme Court. A murder is a murder, it will always be the action of taking away someone's life. How is “The Criminal didn’t know

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

Today, we live in a society faced with many problems, including crime and the fear that it creates. In the modern era, juveniles have become a part of society to be feared, not rehabilitated. The basis of the early juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate and create safe havens for wayward youth. This is not the current philosophy, although the U.S. is one of the few remaining countries to execute juveniles. Presently, our nation is under a presidential administration that strongly advocates the death penalty, including the execution of juveniles. The media and supporters of capital punishment warn of the "superpredator," the juvenile with no fear, remorse, or conscience. Opponents of this view

Mistakes or murders? Children or criminals? Answering these questions requires much deliberation. Trying juveniles in adult court cases isn't orthodox. But such incidents are increasing in America. In 2014 two Wisconsin girls stabbed their classmate 19 times. The state found the twelve-year-olds guilty without considering psychological imbalances (Hanna, Jason). Natural instinct urges one to comply with the decision. However, certain circumstances change perspectives, but only when presented. Trying minors as adults isn't sensible and overlooks many conflicts. Juveniles aren't mentally developed, risk harm in jail, and don't receive adult rights.

In the paper I will be comparing the juvenile and the adult justice systems, there are several differences between the two systems. I will be discussing many aspects within the justice systems. These include but not limited to terminology, due Process rights, arrest to corrections, juvenile crime compared to adult crime, age limits and waivers to adult system and different community correction options available to offenders.

Today, when a child under the age of 18 years old commits a crime, they will automatically be sent to juvenile court, but the law was not always separate for juveniles. The juvenile court system was established in the year of 1899 in the United States (Development of the JJS). The reasoning behind creating a separate court for juveniles is primarily to rehabilitate the youth rather than punishing them by being sent to adult prison. There are certain laws made specifically to protect people and their rights, but when it comes to juveniles there are no laws to protect them in the juvenile justice system whatsoever. Youth are not able to purchase tobacco until they are 21, they cannot have sexual intercourse until 16, and cannot drink alcohol until 21.

The main reason for this is to learn more and have a better understanding of how Juvenile Courts work and about there Juvenile Court Sentencing Options. Kent Scheidegger, legal director, of the criminal justice legal foundation, states that “Most teenagers, know enough to be tried in adult court,” "Minors aren’t fully capable of understanding what is going on, I find not credible in the case of intellectually normal teenagers." he said. Research on the youths brain development shows that teens have a different understanding and common sense from adults. There are discussions among the juvenile courts whether

How can a 15 year old boy be sent to an adult prison for the rest of his life? In order to answer that question we must first understand the history of the Juvenile Justice System. Social conditions during the progressive era, 1890-1920, were characterized by large waves of immigration and an increase in children left wandering in the streets (Reuters, 2011). According to Reuters, hundreds of indigent children were left to find ways to survive in a new place with little to no assistance, from family or government, many typically ended up getting involved in criminal activity. This led to a large increase of children in the adult court systems, as children were treated and punished like adults many were sent to adult institutions. For instance, under English common law, children who were under the age of 7 were considered to lack the cognitive capacity to know and understand the aftermath of their actions. Therefore, without criminal intent, or mens rea, such adolescent children were not capable of committing a crime. Juveniles older than 14, were considered adults, subject to the full weight of the law and punishment, including the death (Soulier and Charles). Nineteenth-century reformers had become uneasy about the effects of immaturity and development in juvenile cases. In response to the rise in

Throughout most of history, young adults and or children did not have a separate status between juvenile and adults. Once you reached the ages of 5 or 6, you became apart of the adult society. There was no separate system for dealing with youth offenders. In the early 1800s, problems with how to deal with youth offenders began to come about due to society going through economical

Throughout the past 30 years or so, the idea of a juvenile or teenager being tried as an adult has been a very controversial issue. When a juvenile commits a very heinous crime, many believe that that youth deserves to be tried as an adult, and given a full sentence. Some even believe that these juveniles deserve to go to adult prison. "When a child kills, does he instantly become an adult? Or does he maintain some trappings of childhood, despite the gravity of his actions?" (Reaves Para 1). What draws the line between a juvenile and adult crime? Sentencing shouldn't change between a juvenile and an adult. Our criminal justice system should stay true to its title and provide justice for all of those that may have been effected by a murder

Many young adolescents who have committed horrendous crimes have been a huge topic amongst the Supreme Court. Whether young adolescents are viewed as innocent, naive children to the public, this not changed the fact they can commit brutal crimes. In spite of the fact that adolescents have committed brutal crimes such as murder, one needs to understand that their brains are not as fully developed as an adult brain would be. Adolescents should not be trialed to a life sentence or attend adult prisons; however, they should be punished for their actions and undergo rehabilitation programs to help them be prepared to fit in with the rest of society.

Teens who commit crimes shouldn’t be charged as adults. It also has to do with the crime, if a teen breaks into a car he/she shouldn’t be charged as adults they should be charged as juvenile. Kids will be kids they will make mistakes but doesn't mean they should have their life taken from them. In the article (Kids are kids-Until they commit crimes) says “It’s a glaring inconsistency that’s getting more glaring by the hour as children as young as twelve and thirteen are being charged as adults in America’s courts.” young teens are getting their life taken away from them, they haven’t learned right from wrong if the court system just gives them life.