It is shocking to know that before 1967 youths in the United States did not have the same rights as adults in court. Before the landmark case In Re Gault individuals underage were not promised the freedoms under the fourteenth amendment. The court system did not take juvenile delinquent cases as seriously. It was almost as if they brushed the delinquents under the rug and put them into a detention center the first chance they got. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in the case of In Re Gault the requirements for due process were not met. This has turned into a landmark case because it has altered the way the juvenile delinquent court system runs.
The Supreme Court of the United States of America in 2012 ruled that juveniles couldn’t be tried as juveniles and be sentenced to life without the possibility of bail, no matter how harsh the nature of the crime committed. Justice Elena Kagan argues that juveniles who commit crimes typically have a rough upbringing or unfortunate circumstances which cannot be controlled by the juvenile. She argues that if they are serving a life in prison without a chance of parole, it causes damage to them psychologically due to the lack of experiences. They will miss the most important moments in life that define who they are as an individual. Elena Kagan thought to believe that juveniles and their cases should be going to court with the consideration of age, immaturity, impetuosity, and behavioral circumstances. Approximately 2,500 juveniles have been charged with life in prison without the possibility of parole as adults before the Supreme Court ruling in 2012.
Crimes are happening around us whether we pay attention to them or not. Those crimes as dangerous as murder are committed by all ages but should younger criminal in their juvenile age received the same punishment as older criminals. On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violates the Eighth Amendment.(On-Demand Writing Assignment Juvenile Justice) Advocates on the concurring side believes that mandatory life in prison is wrong and should be abolish. However, the dissenting side believe that keeping the there should be a life in prison punishment for juvenile who commit heinous crime regardless of their age. I agree that abolishing the mandatory part but not abolishing the whole Juvenile Life Without Parole sentence because I believed that there are cases when a juveniles should get Juvenile Life Without Parole while there are juveniles who should not deserve it. Some deserve it because they non-repentance killers or to be serial killers while other should not deserve it because of the circumstances required them.
The age of the offenders continually decreases, and the brutality of the crimes seems to be increasing. Cameron Williams, age sixteen, celebrated his 16th birthday behind bars (Khan). This young man had been convicted of shooting a police officer who was chasing him around after he had been pulled over by the officer. Williams previously had charges of robbery and assault, also. “Even though he is a minor, Williams was charged in an adult court because of his troublesome history and the "serious nature of the crime," the county attorney's office said. (Khan). Brenda Beadle, chief officer of the county, made a statement saying, “Anybody who pulls a gun and aims it at a police officer is a very serious threat, and I would consider him a very dangerous individual.” (Khan). Williams, being tried as adult, added fuel to the fire of the big debate whether juveniles should be tried as adults. The Justice Department estimates that about 10 percent of all homicides are committed by youths under the age of 18. 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
What if your loved one was savagely killed by a teenager with no remorse? Juveniles should be convicted as adults for ferocious crimes because even though they are “kids” they kill innocent people and should get punished for the crime they committed.
In the article “Remember the Victims of Juvenile Offenders” Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins explains how the killer of her 26 year-old pregnant sister got away not only with that crime but others as well (Bishop-Jenkins 1). Bishop-Jenkins agrees how some teens need long term evaluation before they are able to rejoin the public, as a result should be tried as adults. If these criminals are shown there are no serious consequences for crimes then they will continue their antics. Teens should be tried as adults for felonies if they are unfit for juvenile detention centers for which they can not rehabilitate. Not only will it put criminals behind bars but will allow the victims to experience some
In the article “On Punishment and Teen Killers” published by the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange on Aug 2,2011 the author, Jennifer Jenkins, points out how teen killers should be tried as adults for crimes committed at an adult level. Jenkins states that “... I understand how hard it is to accept the reality that a 16 or 17 year old is capable of forming such requisite criminal intent.” If a the teen intended to kill someone then they should be locked up, but if that was not the intention then they should get the help necessary instead of being locked
Teenagers do not deserve to get life sentences because their brains are not fully developed yet. The human brain does not stop
The article “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences” argues that children in prison need to be given a chance to mature and be rehabilitated (Garinger 9). Because these killers likely committed these crimes on impulse, they would often realize after the fact that they were wrong to do such an action. Therefore, when they are released, they will be more careful and think about their actions before committing. If they are given a life sentence, they will never be given this chance to fix their life. Older people who commit murders are less likely to learn from their mistakes since they put more thought into the killing than adolescents
Juveniles should not be tried and condemned as adults because they do not have the capacity to perceive what is good and bad. There has been a lot of controversy towards the subject of juveniles in the Court Justice System because many feel that juveniles are to young to be entangled with the law. People need to consider the possibilities of what the Juvenile Justice system can do to help and rehabilitate these delinquents instead of sending them off to an adult court to be tried as an adult, even though they are minors. When Juveniles are tried as adults, people do not know what type of person is being sent to jail and what type of person they are going to release into society later on. In the end Juveniles should not be charged as adults.
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/
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 is debated that juveniles are committing more serious and violent crimes because the youth think they can get off easy and take advantage of the system put in place. Those in favor of youth offenders being tried as adults believe that as juveniles are punished to the full extent of the law, future youth offender will think twice before committing a criminal act. In support of this, seventy-five percent of the transferred juveniles interviewed by Redding and Fuller (2004) felt that their experiences in the adult criminal justice system had taught them the serious consequences of committing crimes. As one juvenile explained, “[Being tried as an adult] showed me it’s not a game anymore. Before, I thought that since I’m a juvenile I could do just about anything and just get 6 months if I got
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.
In “On Punishment and Teen Killers”, by Jennifer Jenkins, she reveals how she was a victim of a teen murderer and believes that actual science supporting teenage brains does not negate criminal culpability. She argues, “If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world”, (Par 6). Jenkins believes that supporting evidence on teenage brains does not serve as an excuse to not sentence juveniles to life without parole. She also believes that some teens will never change and find redemption for their actions. Her point is valid in that juveniles cannot be excused for their crimes, however Jenkins lacks the insight that much like how the brain changes through age, a teenager can transition from immaturity to maturity. Furthermore, if sentencing most juvenile to life sentences, it prevents them from learning their mistakes. For example, Greg Ousley during his adult years expressed his regret in killing his parents, and hopes to reconcile with his family members. Ousley comes to a realization, “ what he interpreted in his father as disinterest, even disgust, more likely stemmed from a paralyzing self-consciousness” (Par. 86). Ousley’s realization that his parent’s issues contributed to their lack of understanding to him is a comparable difference in his understanding of his parents when he was a teenager. It provides how even a juvenile who committed murder is able to mature and finding redemption by gain, thus proving that Jenkin’s belief in some teenage murders will never change. Even though teenage murder cannot go unpunished, it does not mean they should be sentenced to life in
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.