Joint enterprise is growing problem in our modern society were teenagers are sentenced because they were present when the offender delivered the fatal blow. There have been arguments for and against joint enterprise and whether the law should stay or be abolished this is because too many young people are being condemned for just witnessing attacks or observing illegal activities. I do believe those who took part deserve to be punished too, just not as rigorously. Personally I believe that the offender who commits the crime should therefore be held accountable and should be punished for it. This leaves us wondering: are the wrong people going to jail?
First of all, there has been a significant rise in the amount of young people being jailed …show more content…
However, the facts disagree with this statement. Court dealing with joint enterprise has seen the appeals increase by 11% between the years 2008 and 2013. If the youth are more aware of Joint enterprise shouldn’t the crime be decreasing? This would be the real evidence that the law is effective. In my opinion I think that joint enterprise has some benefits which I think it has been able to make teenagers more aware of penalties that are obtainable for being present in an …show more content…
We also have seen that there has been an urgent review on Joint enterprise “The Justice Select Committee has called on the government to carry out an “urgent review” of the joint enterprise law in murder cases, saying it has a growing problem that the common law doctrine may be causing injustice” this has increased the amount of appeal cases by 11% to 22% this is because the people prosecuted believe that there is not enough corroboration against them and feel that they are not accountable for it. This shows that many amounts of teenagers are being condemned for crimes they didn’t
The criminal justice system is full of unreasonable laws and reasonings as to why someone would be convicted even if they were declared of not having the ‘intent’ for the crime. These aged laws are a convict of microassaults, they consciously have discriminatory
The criminal justice system is responsible for delivering punishment to breakers of the law, and according to Professor Colin S Diver, the criminal justice system derives its authority with a reliable “moral credibility” (Diver 5). However, the Norsefire methodology of delivering justice is not one that exhibits a
The YCJA was said to solve the political need striking a balance between two contradicting objectives, protecting society from predatory youth, and the desire to avoid unnecessarily criminalizing minor offenders (Tanner, 2012). To accomplish these objectives the Act would follow the principles of accountability and proportionality, youth who commit serious or violent crimes will be punished as harshly as they should be, and minor offenses will be dealt with diversionary measures, such as EJMs (“Emergence of Juvenile Justice Systems”, March 15, 2017). For instance, EJMs that were commonly used included, police and Crown issued warnings, referrals to community programs, counselling, and educational programs, these measures are to avoid needlessly criminalizing youth who have only committed minor
Within the urban communities, negative perceptions are magnified. Adolescents are more prone to be a product of their environment, especially those whose parents are incarcerated. Because of this trend adolescents are being incarcerated at an alarming rate and sentenced to adult facilities. Lambie & Randall (2013) states, the United States have imposed harsher penalties on serious young offenders, and have consequently increased rates of incarcerated youth and made it easier for youth to be treated and incarcerated as adults within the justice
On somewhat positive side, New generations are more implicated in minor offenses such as Cannabis possessions, Common Assault, Theft, and mischief. It also proclaims that young adults who were accused in 2014 were the ages of 18 to 24 years old. Important to realize, that the The highest rate of charge was for violence by 51% and second highest rate of charge was for property which came in by 38 %. In my opinion, when you take a look at The YCJA it clarifies that there is always a reason to why a child acts a certain way; wheter its from being abused to mental health problems; hence, the purpose of this act is to observe and understand the root of the
About every year the FBI will arrest more than 33,000 young adults for offenses. This number is too high. America should not have this many juveniles acting out and committing horrific acts. Trying these adolescents in adult court should instill fear in them, and hopefully make them think of the consequences before they act out. “The number of violent crimes committed by young people declined
Teens Tried as Adults Teens are the future of our society. They are the ones who will soon run the world we live in today. People make mistakes and no one is perfect. From these mistakes people learn, however some do not. Most of the time when a teen makes a bad choice something gets broken, they screw up in class or hurt someone's feelings.
Based on strong textual evidence and corresponding research it is clear that mandatory life sentence for juveniles who commit murder is unfair because juveniles are immature, cannot remove themselves from a toxic home environment, and is
Those in favor of trying juveniles as adults believe that it deters and minimizes crimes being committing by all minors. That trying juveniles as adults will bring the greatest good to the most amount of people. According to an article posted by the American Bar Association by Nicole Scialabba, “the increase in laws that allow more juveniles to be prosecuted in adult court rather than juvenile court was intended to serve as a deterrent for rising youth violent crime.” It is no secret that youth commit crimes in our society. In 2014, law enforcement agencies in the U.S. made an estimated 1 million arrests of persons under age 18 (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention).
It has been observed that there are numerous researches conducted on youth crime particularly in the United Kingdom which gave the emphasis on young individuals as offenders instead of victims of crime. Moreover, radical criminology significantly contributed to understand the youth crime through different theories. According to Yar (2012), radical criminology is known as the conflict philosophy. It centres its perceptions on crime and on regulation in the faith that capitalist civilisations precipitate as well as describe crime as the possessors by sense of production utilise their influence to endorse commandments that would regulate the working class and suppress intimidations to the supremacy of the governing class. Radical criminology draws together the studies of interactionism, labelling, Marxism, critical criminology and gender which provide the understanding of youth crime from different perspective as discussed in the paper.
Treatment rather than Punishment Thesis Statement: Children, as innocents and infantile, are unconsciously doing unwanted acts that may violate our laws, therefore insufficient guidance from family, environmental factors syndicates, poverty and problem on education, which are the main rationales for their involvement on crimes should be given corresponding solution by the government. INTRODUCTION Juvenile delinquency means that a youth specifically those who are below 18 years old commits an act that is against the law. It can also be used as legal term for the criminal behavior carried out by minors. According to UNICEF, an average of 10, 500 minors are being arrested and detained every year – about 28 children every day, or more
If we look at the different criminal justice systems around the world, most countries have laws or regulations stating the “age of criminal responsibility” (Maher. G). However, there has been no clear international standard identified regarding the age at which criminal responsibility could be reasonably charged for a juvenile offender. The Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC) appeals parties to establish ‘a minimum age below which children shall be
As people became more individualized however beliefs and values would shift so the law needed to reflect the ideals and values of the society. Within David Garland’s chapter on punishment and social solidarity he recognises that punishment is not necessarily in place to correct behaviour but to keep society as a whole. While there is a correlation between punishment and criminal activity to keep society intact there has to be in a place a set of values within the legal system that force a kind of communality. People who enter the prison system are made examples of representing what a society values. It can be a person being imprisoned for life due to murder or for thievery within each society there are consequences for deviating from values.