Violence In Juvenile Cases

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.

Nothing should be done with the young children of violence-prone criminals because they had no say so in being conceived. If research could prove that the tendency to commit crime is inherited, then the criminal parent(s) should be required to take some sort of birth control. It would be an invasion of privacy to monitor the children’s behavior at any early age. Besides, Siegel (2016) states, ”Why would these killers, most of whom at one time had attended college, gone out on date, and had friendships…People who knew them claimed they seemed to have gone through a significant personality change just before the murders took place” (p. 127). This quote provides evidence that not all criminals begin at a young age, so why keep an eye on them when

Approximately two million adolescents a year are arrested and out of that two million, 60,000 of them are incarcerated according to the American Journal of Public Health. The 60,000 incarcerated adolescents each year are being tried as adults in court because of the serious crimes they have committed. The crimes they have committed are anything from armed robbery to murder. Some juveniles might be first time offenders and others might be repeat offenders. Crimes have always been a major issue in the United States and can cause controversy in the criminal justice system. Charging a minor as an adult in criminal court varies from state to state based on each state’s jurisdiction. Some states consider anyone up to the age of 18 still a juvenile and would not be charged as an adult in criminal court, but other states may charge a juvenile as an adult at the age of 16 or 17. Jordan (2014) states, “Although states already had methods for transferring youth to the adult system, as a result of the growing fear of juvenile violence, most states implemented new laws to increase the number of youth entering the adult criminal system’ (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010; Torbet et al., 1996)” (p. 315). While it sounds beneficial to incarcerate more adolescents in the adult criminal justice system to avoid juveniles from committing crimes in the future, that is not always the case. Incarcerating these juveniles can be life changing in a negative

There are times where a juvenile may be eligible for transfer to adult criminal court. There are certain criteria that must be met for this to happen, and there is a strong belief that juveniles who commit serious offenses would be more appropriately dealt with by criminal (or adult) courts (Elrod & Ryder, 2011). Juveniles are capable of committing the same serious offenses that adults do. Therefore, with the requirements of a transfer being met, there are times that juveniles should be placed in the adult criminal court system and tried through here, rather than the juvenile court system. The juvenile court system may not have the same consequences or sentencing guidelines as the adult criminal court; therefore, the proper punishment may

The dilemma of whether or not to transfer juveniles to adult court has been a major topic, for many years, in the United States. Since 1899, judges have had the option to transfer juveniles to adult court. The major factor for transferring juveniles to adult court since then has been the seriousness of the offense. That being said, juveniles only make up a small portion of violent crimes in the United States. Only 16 percent of juvenile offenders in 2008 were arrested for violent crimes (Champion,2008). The problem is the determination of whether the crime is serious enough to be waived and transferred to adult court. Almost every state has statutory judicial waiver provisions, which grant juvenile judges the authority to transfer

The use of moving a child from the Juvenal Court system and placing them in the Adult Court system to stand trial for criminal offenses as an adult in a judicial process that has been happening, more and more, in the United States over the past 40 years (Kilkelly, 2016). The criminal charges that have faced the young offenders under the age of 18 moving them to receive harsh punishments from the Adult Court Systems in the United States are crimes such as rape, murder, and drug offenses just to name a few of them (Kilkelly, 2016).

Court systems are left with difficult decisions. A controversial decision courts are faced with today is whether or not juveniles are to be tried as adults. The increasing number of incarcerated children in adult jails raises questions as to why. Adolescents sentenced to prison are more likely to be abused, commit suicide, or reoffend, thus committing more serious offenses. The statutes requiring juveniles to enter adult prisons are inhumane and in-just. Nevertheless, sentencing children to adult prisons continues regularly today. When adolescents commit crimes, they should be tried as juveniles rather than adults.

The juvenile justice system varies from the adult justice system in many ways. For more than a century, the states have believed that the juvenile justice system was a means to ensuring public safety, by establishing and implementing a system that responds to children as they are maturing into adulthood. Today’s youths, however, are increasingly committing more serious crimes that in turn are raising the public’s criticism concerning the modern juvenile justice system. There are those who are in support of keeping every juvenile I juvenile court system and then there are the others who argue if juveniles were held to stricter standards they would not become repeat offender in the system and eventual end up in the adult corrections system.

At the end of the 19th Century, the U.S. made legal history when the world's first juvenile court opened in Chicago(Horwitz-Prisco). The court was founded on two basic principles. First, juveniles lacked the maturity to take responsibility for their actions the way adults could. Second, because their character was not yet fully developed, they could be rehabilitated more successfully than adult criminals. More than a century later, these principles remain the benchmarks of juvenile justice in the United States(Horowitz-Prisco).In recent years, however, a growing number of juvenile criminals are being tried as adults. In part this stems from public outrage against children who are committing violent crimes. Many young children in America are

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

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.

Violence among youth has become a serious problem worldwide. In 2016, the United States ranked homicide as the third leading cause of death for people ages ten to twenty-four years old. Homicide is ranked as the fourth leading cause of death for this age group worldwide. A juvenile is defined as a person who is under the age of eighteen. Six hundred and five juveniles were arrested in 2015 for murder, two thousand seven hundred and forty-five for forcible rape, and twenty-one thousand nine hundred and nine-three for aggravated assault. These acts of violence make the communities in which citizens live more dangerous. As these crime rates rise, the values of the homes and business begin to go down as well. This has become an issue for concern because more and more youth are being convicted of serious crimes. In 2010, juveniles made up 13.7% of those who were arrested from violent crimes. While youth violence has always been present in society, it is becoming present through technology too. In earlier times in order to hurt someone they had to be physically present. Now a days, it has become easier to bully someone from his or her home through the Internet. 15.5% of students admit to being bullied through electronics in 2015. Youth violence is a cause for concern in Family and Consumer Science related fields because those who are working with juveniles should be aware of the problems they are facing.

The Juvenile System has been around for a long time. The primary reason behind separating Juvenile from adult criminals is quite simple; the judicial system believes that the children are less culpable for their irresponsive behavior and they could easily be reformed as compared to adult offenders. The crucial role of the judicial system is to critically investigate, diagnose, and recommend treatments for the Juveniles rather than accrediting them. However, because of the increasing number of juvenile arrest for crimes committed by persons considered as a child, the attention that the given to a crime involving juveniles, the decreasing trust to the juvenile system itself and the lauder roar of the society for a safer place to live in,

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.