In Re Gault Case Study

Edward Humes is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and a PEN Award recipient for his nonfiction work, No Matter How Loud I Shout: A Year in the Life of Juvenile Court. His training and experiences reflect No Matter How Loud I Shout because he has immersed himself in the court system of California and spent one year in the justice system in Los Angeles, Inglewood, and Pomona, California, which gave him insight into the juvenile system and the necessary skills and resources to construct this book. Along with this book, Humes has written thirteen other nonfiction books. They range from discussing the G.I. Bill to looking at American high schools. Humes writes about the American people and the effects of social life and the government. No Matter How Loud I Shout aligns with this subject matter because it breaks down the juvenile court system and its effects on American youth.

Juveniles being tried as adults in the justice system face the same penalties as adults, including life without parole, will receive little or no education, mental health treatment, or rehabilitative programming. Transferring adolescents to the adult system is counterproductive and even harmful because adult facilities cannot meet the special needs of the juvenile offender. Trying juveniles as adults they will obtain an adult criminal record that may significantly limit their future education and employment opportunities. This choice to try juveniles as adults put them at greater risk of assault and death in adult jails and prisons with adult inmates. The ultimate outcome of transferring juvenile offenders to adult prisons is overwhelmingly

In America’s society, there are an estimated 1.2 million violent crimes committed every year. Adults are not the only individuals that are committing violent crimes. Juveniles are estimated to be involved in twenty-five percent of all violent crimes. Along with these crimes comes the decision on whether these juveniles should be tried as minors or adults, which has created an immense controversy around the United States. Certain juveniles are tried as adults because they must be held accountable for their actions, it brings justice to their victims, and because those individuals have a moral sense.

A Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted a study in 40 of the nation’s largest urban communities. “It was found that an estimated 7,100 juvenile defendants were charged with felonies in adult criminal court in 1998. Of these 40 county criminal courts, juveniles were 64% more likely than adults to be charged with a violent felony. These juvenile defendants were generally treated as serious offenders, as 52% did not receive pretrial release, 63% were convicted of a felony, and 43% of those convicted received a prison sentence. States have expanded the mechanisms by which juveniles can be charged in criminal courts. In 1998, statutory exclusion was the most common method (42%) used to charge juveniles defendants compared to the more traditional use of juvenile waiver (24%). In the 40 counties in 1998, 62% of the juvenile felony defendants were black, 20% were white, 16% were Hispanic, and almost 2% were of another race” (“Bureau of Justice Statistics”).As time goes on, crime rates of youths

The federal government’s “War on Crime” by the Johnson administration in the 60s made way for tougher law enforcement and surveillance (Hinton, 2015). However, with this came the separation of children and adults in the criminal justice system; then the separation of juvenile delinquents from status offenders. As mentioned, status offenders are different from juvenile delinquents because they had broken rules which apply to only children. Meanwhile, juvenile delinquents are youths under the age of 18, who committed offenses that would be punishable to adults as well. By the late 1960s, there became a growing concern that juveniles involved in the court-based status-offense system, were not getting their best interests met (Shubik & Kendall, 2007). This can be seen in the growing number of court-involved status offenders who were being detained and placed outside of their homes for noncriminal behavior (Shubik & Kendall, 2007). Following multiple studies and research, the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice recommended that the juvenile court be the agency of last resort and that community-based organizations, not penal institutions, should be responsible for these youths (Shubik & Kendall, 2007; Farrington,

The juvenile justice system has made numerous of ethical issues when managing juvenile offenders. The issue with the juvenile justice system is the laws and rules that govern it. It has led to years of controversial debate over the ethical dilemmas of the juvenile corrections system, and how they work with youth offenders. The number of minors entering the juvenile justice system is increasing every month. The reasons why the juvenile justice system faces ethical dilemmas is important and needs to be addressed: (1) a vast proportion of juveniles are being tried and prosecuted as adults; (2) the psychological maturation of the juvenile to fully comprehend the justice system; and (3) the factors that contribute to minorities being adjudicated in the juvenile justice system are more likely than White offenders. These three ethical issues that are rising in the juvenile justice system will be further examined.

Childress, S. (2016, June 2). More States Consider Raising the Age for Juvenile Crime. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/more-states-consider-raising-the-age-for-juvenile-crime/

In today’s world there are countless crimes committed every single day. “In 2015, there were 1.42 million total arrests, at a rate of 3,641 arrests per 100,000 residents” (State of California, Department of Justice). Grown adults are not the only people being arrested every year, there are also juveniles, children, being arrested every day. One topic of controversy today is whether or not juveniles who commit these crimes should be tried as adults in criminal court. There are many differences between the justice system for adults and the justice system for juveniles. If a juvenile is defined as a person under the age of eighteen can we justify trying them in as an adult? Is convicting juveniles as adults a better solution?

We have seen today in society of how crime rates have been rampant and how statistics show that most of the crimes were being made by minors. I believe that when most of them look at the bottom of these young offenders come disproportionately from impoverished single-parent homes that are located in the neighbourhoods desinvertido and have high rates of learning disabilities, mental health, and substance abuse and problems with the help of the system of juvenile justice that can make a great return on a successful transition to adulthood. Their ages ranged from 20 and under, most are under fifteen years of age.

For many years and throughout the United States children have been disobeying rules as well as the law. Children are usually taught right from wrong but there are some that still choose to do what they want to do and go against their parent’s rules and the laws that are set within the states that they reside. So, once a child has made the decision to break a law and commit a crime, they are considered to be a juvenile delinquent. Most juveniles are either given rehabilitation or they are placed in a juvenile detention center, but it only depends on the type of charge they are receiving from the crime they have committed. Throughout this research I will be discussing a case of a juvenile who was waived to adult status. Explaining the mechanisms

The first major court case to influence our treatment of juveniles today was the Kent v. United States. The case overall, made an impact on the treatment of juveniles today because now juveniles have a right to an attorney, the parents must be notified and either parents or a lawyer must be present during an interrogation, and juveniles must be reminded of his or her right to silence. The main thing that this case influenced was that courts must allow juveniles the right to defend themselves and to be heard when transferring a juvenile over to the adult system.

Should juveniles get treated as adults that’s one of the biggest controversy in our nation now days, with many juveniles committing crimes that are inconceivable according to their age. Judges have the last word on how to treat this young people. Many people argue that “the teens that are under eighteen are only kids, they won’t count them as young adults, not until they commit crimes. And the bigger the crime, the more eager this people are to call them adults” (Lundstrom 87). This is why people can’t come to a decision as how these young people should be treated like. As adults or as juveniles, according to how serious is the crime they committed.

Prior to 1899 in the United States, children who committed a criminal offense were tried and punished as adults. Children were being institutionalized with adult criminals where they were picking up negative influences preparing them for a life of crime. Progressive and social change demanded that children be protected and educated instead and therefore a separate court system for juveniles was subsequently established to address this problem. It has since being argued that juvenile courts have abandoned their role to rehabilitate juvenile delinquents and should be abolished.

The term “juvenile delinquency” is fairly new in respect to the world of criminology and the justice system. Until around the 1800s, children and adults were treated equally in regards to the law. In fact, the word “delinquent” was not even used until the 19th century. Delinquency is best defined as “violations of the criminal law by minors” (Agnew 4). However, adults gradually came to the consensus that children do not act similarly to adults and the reasoning behind their actions are not similar to those of adults and therefore should be treated differently than adults, including punishments for law-breaking. Juveniles today have a separate court system that places the emphasis on correcting the behavior rather than punishing the individual.

Can you imagine waking up behind closed walls and bars? Waking up to see your inmate who is a 45-year-old bank robber and you are a 14-year-old minor who made a big mistake. This is why minors who have committed crimes should not be treated the same as adults. Some reasons are because the consequences given to minors in adult court would impact a minor’s life in a negative way. If a minor is tried through a juvenile court, they have a greater chance of rehabilitation.