Essay on The Tragic Case of Larry and Brandon

After the class discussion on the final chapters of Just Mercy, I decided to switch my project from homeless veterans to juvenile life incarceration. In the final chapters, Stevenson revisits some of his previous clients, many of whom are child offenders. He then fights to exonerate them. Fighting for his clients he also brought about change for others who were in the same situations. In 2010, after much deliberation, the Supreme Court ruled to eliminate “death in prison” sentences for non-homicide juvenile offenders.

Ritter implicates that adolescents “particularly when confronted with stressful or emotional decisions, are more likely to act impulsively, on instinct, without fully understanding or analyzing the consequences of their actions” (Ritter). This exact reason can explain why Charlie shot his mothers boyfriend, as the years of abuse kept adding up to the point he acted out on instinct. The reason as to why adolescents act impulsively, such as Charlie is due to lack of full development in their brain, mainly in the region of the frontal lobes. This evidence suggests that teens have less control over their environment, and tend to not become violent adults, although violent as adolescents. This seems a likely explanation for the boy’s behavior, that and the abuse he endured. The fact that the justice system was still seeking the death penalty for this type of crime, is not unreasonable given the circumstances, and this course of action has not been effective in deterring juvenile crime or actually serving justice.

Anthony Rolon was one out of roughly three dozen teens in Massachusetts to be convicted of murder and sentenced to mandatory life in prison without parole during the 1980’s to 1990’s. When the details of Rolon’s crime were being discussed, I initially thought he had intended to kill his victim, Bobby

In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” by Jennifer Jenkins asserts that teens are becoming more violent and starting commit more crimes because of the national television they watch.Jenkins tells the reader about “JLWOP” (Juvenile Life Without Parole) and how kids are being sentenced to life in prison without parole.Some people are trying to advocate to minimize the offender culpability because of their age.While kids are getting sentenced to life without parole, this disproves juvenile advocates reliance on the undeveloped brain.Some juvenile offenders truly understand what the victim family go through and how long it takes them to recover.There were millions of dollars spent to end JLWOP and to set convicted murderers free.

The author of this article is Kallee Spooner is a PHD candidate at Sam Houston State University. Currently she works on a National Institute of Justice study as a Doctoral Research Assistant. Her focus is corrections, juvenile justice, and legal analyses in criminal justice (S.H.S University). In her article, “Juvenile Life Without Parole,” Spooner addresses the punishment of Juvenile life without parole and questions its constitutionality. She begins with raw numbers, including which states have the most juvenile serving LWOP. Further discussed are the facts that 98% of JLWOP inmates are male, and that black youth are 10 times more likely to receive the sentence than white youth. In terms of severity, LWOP is significantly harsher for

Almost every day, we hear about justice being served upon criminals and we, as a society, feel a sense of relief that another threat to the public has been sentenced to a term in prison, where they will no longer pose a risk to the world at large. However, there are very rare occasions where the integrity of the justice system gets skewed and people who should not have been convicted are made to serve heavy prison sentences. When word of this judicial misstep reaches the public, there is social outcry, and we begin to question the judicial system for committing such a serious faux pas.

Bryan Stevenson’s primary focus as a lawyer is death penalty cases and fights to get wrongfully accused inmates off death row. We are introduced to Walter McMillan’s case where he is charged for a crime he did not commit. Despite hard evidence that would prove he’s innocent, because its coming from the black community, its disregarded by the court. He even had an all-white jury involved in his case. In fact, the most shocking part about this case is that Walter was placed on death row before his case went to trial, which is illegal. This is one of the many unjust cases that have happened in the past and that are currently happening.

This paper is aimed at raising questions on the TED talk’s subjects of injustice and how we are priming some kids for college and others for prison. Bryan Stevenson talks on the topics of injustice and poverty stating that there is a correlation between the two and he also talks about reforming our justice system which would lead to changing some very crucial amendments within our constitutional rights. The questions I raise to his statements are as follows, one… considering that the biggest statistic for the death of young black males under the age of 20 is other black males does a societal change need to be made? Two, in regards to changing the way our justice system works, would you be ok with allowing people like Charles Manson, Richard Ramirez, and other psychopaths to roam freely after 20 years without the death penalty. Three, would you be willing to get rid of the 4th and 5th amendments as well as the exclusionary rule in exchange for a blanket allowance of all truthful evidence? Now in regards to Alice Goffman and her speech on College vs Prison I felt a sense of urgency to state “good, but what are the solutions?” or what do you propose we do as a society to keep our youth out of prison and get them on the track to success? Ms. Goffman’s statements were geared more towards pointing the finger rather than offering a viable solution to the problem.

“Murder begins where self-defense ends.” This quote from Georg Buchner can be used to describe the tragic deaths of three little boys who were rendered defense-less against their attackers. On May 5, 1993 in West Memphis, Arkansas, three young second-grade boys, by the names of Christopher Byers, Steven Branch, and Michael Moore, were brutally murdered after being beaten and hogtied by their own shoelaces. A year later, Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jessie Misskelley were convicted and sent to prison for this heinous crime. Even though the three men were convicted for the crime, there is still great controversy as to who actually killed the three boys. Throughout all this controversy, evidence, testimony, confessions, and more point towards the three men known as the “West Memphis Three”, to be the real killers.

When the Judge announced the verdict “Guilty” there was a slight murmur in the court room as was expected. Then the Judge began to announce the sentence “Life in prison without the possibility of parole”, the words cutting through the air like an arrow through a paper target. The courtroom was an arena of mixed feelings, half cheering in a celebratory manner, the other half crying and shouting in disbelief. Someone’s 13 year old son was going to prison for the rest of his life without any chance of parole. Children should never be sentenced to life without parole, making the sentence in

On October 3, 2012, five young men decide to skip school and burglarize a home being the young naive children that they are. Four of the five young men entered the home under the impression that the home was empty but unfortunately for them, the homeowner was home and was armed. Being startled, the homeowner grabbed his weapon and began to fire at the intruders of his home. Two of the four boys were shot and one of them was killed (Drizin and Keller). Because they were committing a felony when their friend was killed, they were charged with his death. These four boys became victims of the felony murder law. They were given sentences ranging from 45 to 55 years. The sentences that these boys received were completely unjust and extreme for their actions. They should only be charged with the crime that they committed because they were not old enough to understand the consequences of their actions, they did not commit a murder, and they did not receive a fair trial.

“There were three men who hurt me on the first night. They touched me and made me do things…. They came back the next night and hurt me a lot…. There were so many last night. I don’t know how many there were, but they hurt me . . . .” Charlie, a 14 year old boy, confessed reluctantly to Bryan Stevenson, a lawyer and social activist. Charlie was considered a “good kid”, until he shot his mother’s abusive boyfriend, George, a local police officer. After that, he was placed in adult jail. ("How America’s Justice System Failed Our Children"). Although what Charlie did was ruled second-degree murder, what he had to face, and will continue to face from the trauma, from adult jail is arguably worse. This tragedy continues to be the harsh reality of juveniles sent to adult jail. Each year 200,000 youths are tried as adults (Rozzell). Juveniles are put in stressful situations and without the role models they need, they make one poor choice that destroys the rest of their life. Some are held in adult jail awaiting their trial, many of whom committed nonviolent offenses. These incarcerated juveniles, who do not even have a fully developed brain, have their current and future lives destroyed by being tried and held as adults.

Imagine yourself as a teenager rotting away in a jail cell your whole life. More importantly, imagine that the reason your are there is because your were trying to protect yourself. Erik Jensen, 17, and Nathan Ybanez, 15, were sentenced to prison for life without parole. Nathan struck his mother with fireplace tongs; then he, Erik, and their friend, Brett Benson, destroyed the evidence. Brett took a plea bargain. Some say they deserve life because of their crime, but they were not in the right place of mind. Therefore, justice was not served in either case.

The night was calm with a few whistles of wind every now and then. Twelve year old Chris just left his house after finding a gun under the kitchen table. He was walking the streets alone pointing the gun, acting like he was in Call of Duty. Boom! Boom! Man down! Man down! He was having fun pretending. Out of the black mist, a sneaky man came up behind Chris and yelled “What in the hell are you doing!” Chis turned around panicked and accidentally fired the gun, killing the man in one shot. Chris was arrested and charged as an adult with murder. He was sentenced to life-in-prison without parole. His family felt diminished. How could a twelve year old child be left to rot in jail for the rest of his life? Even though he committed a serious crime, he is only a child. Incarcerating children is a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S Constitution, because children in adult jail do not receive proper rehabilitation, food, water, or hygiene.

In Stephen Bright’s article, “The Death Penalty as the Answer to Crime: Costly, Counterproductive, and Corrupting” Bright asserts that capital punishment does not work because it is racially biased, the quality of the lawyers and attorneys supplied by the state to poor defendants is unfair, and that the law system currently in place does not accomplish its true goals. Bright defends his claim with logos and ethos by examining the opinions of judges and district attorneys, and by describing experience within the fields of human rights and law himself in order to persuade the reader to take up more cases for those on death row. Given the language used in this article Bright is writing to an audience with intermediate to professional experience within the field of law, and a willingness to adopt a new idea on the constitutionality behind the death penalty.