More handpicked essays just for you.
History of the death penalty around the world
Criminal justice issues in law enforcement and juvenile justice
Criminal justice juvenile justice research paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
. The next juvenile case is that of Lionel Tate. The facts of the case are as follows, Lionel Tate at the age of 12 was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the murder of six-year-old Tiffany Eunick. The murder was committed while Tate’s mother was tasked with babysitting Tiffany on July 28th 1999. At around 10:40 pm Tate told his mother that Tiffany was not breathing. Tate said that he was only wrestling with Tiffany before she stopped breathing and had her head in a headlock when she smashed against the side of a table. He stated that he watched roll around on the floor and cry afterwards before he decided to go back to watching television. By the time Tate alerted his mother, the girls broken and bruised body was already cold. …show more content…
With that said, the passage in the constitution regarding the death penalty has since been revised calling for harsher punishments for more severe crimes no matter the age of the criminal. More juveniles have been transferred from juvenile court to criminal court and those that have committed capital offenses are now subject to life sentences, as well as the death penalty. There are currently 23 states that have decided to allow the death penalty for minors who have committed capital offenses. “Since this development 17 men have been executed because of the crimes they have committed as children, and 74 people are on death row because of the crimes they committed in adolescence.” (Streib, 2000). Based on information from a list of offenders executed due to their crimes from the year 1973 to 2000, none of the offenders committed the crimes under the age of 16. This is important because it shows how they were well past the developmental stages, and are very much able to discern what their “morals” of right and wrong. The decision for them to receive the death penalty was also in regards to Public Safety. Being that there was no guarantee if they were ever let out that they wouldn’t commit another crime the safest bet was execution, though it was commenced more than ten years after their …show more content…
Ernest van den Haag who is a professor at Fordham University stated, “Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks” (Ernest van den Haag, 2000). Van den Haag is very much correct in stating fear of death deters most, especially an anticipated death set up by the courts. But these incentives do not necessarily work if they are not enforced equally upon all who commit the same crime. For example, a teenager about 16 years old is smart enough to understand that if he were to commit a capital crime he would not be charged as an adult, therefore committing the crime
Diagnosing Lionel Tate Using Different Psychological Theories On January 26, 2001, 13-year-old Lionel Tate was convicted in the first-degree murder of Tiffany Eunick. The incident occurred in July of 1999 in Pembroke Park, Florida. Tate, then twelve, claimed he was imitating pro wrestlers when he killed six-year-old Eunick. He claimed to have picked the girl up and accidentally thrown her into a stair handrail and wall while trying to throw her onto a sofa.
For a long time, Memphis has been considered one of the United States’ most dangerous cities. When compared to other urban communities of similar sizes, the city in the Mid-South usually tops the list in terms of the number of crimes. Its violent and property crime rates are among the country’s highest, and in the recent years, statistics have shown that they are continuing to increase (Peagler). One specific area of concern regarding Memphis’ crimes is the alarming rate of youth offenders. Like the city’s other rates, the amount of crimes involving juveniles are on the rise, and thus, more effort should be made to prevent young persons from engaging in criminal behavior. The proposed solutions are to demand more beneficial volunteering from
America is no stranger for juveniles being tried as adults. The first known case being in 1642; Thomas Granger, 16, who had sex with a mare, cow and some goats was hanged in Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts.1 He was America's first documented execution of a child offender and the debut of the juvenile death penalty.1 The youngest girl to be executed was 12-year-old Hannah Ocuish who was hanged for killing a 6-year-old white child in 1786.1 Finally, James Echols, was the last execution in 1964 who was executed for rape two years later at the age of 19.1
If a family member was murdered, a family member was murdered, age should not dictate if the punishment for homicide will be more lenient or not. If anyone not just juveniles has the capabilities to take someone's life and does so knowing the repercussions, they should be convicted as an adult. In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins who lost her sister, the husband and their unborn child, is a strong advocate of juveniles being sentenced to life without parole. In her article “Jennifer Bishop Jenkins On Punishment and Teen Killers” she shows the world the other side of the spectrum, how it is to be the victim of a juvenile in a changing society where people are fighting against life sentences for juveniles. As she states in the article “There are no words adequate to describe what this kind of traumatic loss does to a victims family. So few who work on the juvenile offender side can truly understand what the victims of their crimes sometimes go through. Some never
Since the ban, it has happened 22 times, 21 of them for 17 year olds who ended up turning 18 before the execution, and one much younger, who killed his family. Was it a right decision that the supreme court made? Minors have an entire life full of changing experiences ahead of them, and it seems “cruel and unusual” to take that from a child. Generally, it’s respected as a good decision to prevent the death sentence on a minor, but there are some questions to be asked. What if the minor is a mass murderer or commits treason? Those seem like good reasons to use the death sentence. However, children learn a lot better than adults and can easily change their ways or attitudes in prison. The minors could still contribute positively to the world, and the death sentence would prevent that completely.
Crime rates across the U.S. for juveniles is at all time high. Juveniles across all demographic have been punished more severely than those of the past. Contributing factors including lower socioeconomic areas such as the Detroit Metropolitan Areas & Chicago. This paper will discuss the apparent issue within the system focusing on juveniles in urban areas.
The answer to the question of whether or not the death penalty deters crime is no, it does not. For one, the fear of possibly being sentenced to death isn’t nearly enough to stop a crime from happening. Philosophy professor and Holocaust survivor Agnes Heller, who appeared on the “Death Penalty” episode of “Penn & Teller: Bullshit!” to argue against the death penalty, points out that there are different motives for those types of crimes where the convicted could be sentenced to death: there are crimes of passion, crimes for profit, and crimes for pleasure (such as a serial killer fulfilling their fantasy), and that in all of these circumstances, the desire to go forward with the crime is strong enough that they either don’t care about the consequ...
Many theories, at both the macro and micro level, have been proposed to explain juvenile crime. Some prominent theories include Social Disorganization theory, Differential Social Organization theory, Social Control theory, and Differential Association theory. When determining which theories are more valid, the question must be explored whether people deviate because of what they learn or from how they are controlled? Mercer L. Sullivan’s book, “Getting Paid” Youth Crime and Work in the Inner City clearly suggests that the learning theories both at the macro level, Differential social organization, and micro level, Differential association theory, are the more accurate of the two types of theory.
Juvenile crime in the United States is ballooning out of control along with adult crimes, and politicians and law enforcement officials don’t seem to be able to do anything about it. Despite tougher sentencing laws, longer probation terms, and all other efforts of lawmakers, the crime and recidivism rates in our country can’t be reduced. The failure of these recent measures along with new research and studies by county juvenile delinquency programs point to the only real cure to the U.S.’s crime problem: prevention programs. The rising crime rates in the United States are of much worry to most of the U.S.’s citizens, and seems to be gaining a sense of urgency. Crime ranks highest in nationwide polls as Americans’ biggest concern (Daltry 22). For good reason- twice as many people have been victims of crimes in the 1990s as in the 1970s (Betts 36). Four times as many people under the age of eighteen were arrested for homicide with a handgun in 1993 than in 1983 (Schiraldi 11A). These problems don’t have a quick fix solution, or even an answer that everyone can agree on. A study by the Campaign for an Effective Crime Policy has found no deterrent effects of the “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law recently put into effect by politicians (Feinsilber 1A). It has been agreed however that there is not much hope of rehabilitating criminals once started on a life of crime. Criminologist David Kuzmeski sums up this feeling by saying, “If society wants to protect itself from violent criminals, the best way it can do it is lock them up until they are over thirty years of age.... I am not aware of any treatment that has been particularly successful.” The problem with his plan is that our country simply doesn’t have the jail space, or money to ...
The United States has been affected by a number of crimes committed by juveniles. The juvenile crime rate has been increasing in recent years. Everyday more juveniles commit crimes for various reasons. They act as adults when they are not officially adults. There is a discussion about how juveniles should be punished if they commit heinous crimes. While many argue that juveniles who commit serious crimes, such as murder, should be treated as adults, the fact is, juveniles under the age of eighteen, are not adults, and should not be treated as such.
Due to the increased recognized differences between adults and juveniles in terms of needs and developmental capabilities, offender’s treatment differ depending on whether they are treated in an adult or juvenile court. In the adult court jurisdiction, public safety and retribution are the most salient tenets while in the juvenile courts the best the intentions are intended towards the best interest of the child focusing on rehabilitation. The best goals and objectives of the juvenile court sanctions aim at ensuring that the youth in trial at the juvenile court desists from delinquent behavior and thus easy to be reintegrated in the society once more. This fact is mainly achieved through offering the youth individualized case management programs
There was a 6-3 decision vote for New Jersey. The search that ended with T.L.O's marijuana being found was reasonable. The majority opinion included: Warren Burger, Byron White, Harry Blackmun, Lewis Powell F. Jr., William Rehnquist, and Sandra Day O'Connor. The opposing Justices included: Thurgood Marshall, William J Brennan Jr., and John Paul Stevens.
On the other side of the debate, there are those that believe that the death penalty is a deterrent. For most criminals, they are aware of the fact that if they get caught, they will be sent to prison. However, other than being sent to prison, there are not really any other repercussions for committing a crime. They argue that if a person were to be presented with the possibility of the death penalty, they would more than likely think twice about their actions and realize that there are more risks than just im...
Of the 40 death penalty jurisdictions in the United States, 21 jurisdictions have expressly chosen a minimum age of 18, 5 jurisdictions have chosen an age 17 minimum, and the other 14 death penalty jurisdictions use age 16 as the minimum age. However, several more states are considering raising their minimum age for the death penalty to age 18. The Supreme Court has held that executing 16- and 17-year-old offenders does not violate the Constitution. The Court has not openly and fervently endorsed the death penalty for juvenile offenders. The juvenile death penalty rate is declining, but it needs to be abolished. Adolescents who commit murder should suffer consequences since they are old enough to know right from wrong. Most, however, are unable to understand the total repercussions of their acts on themselves or their victims.
"Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death... Therefore, a life sent...