Read the article posted under the Course Materials tab, "The Supreme Court Rules Again that Juveniles are Different." Also, watch the video at this link: https://youtu.be/WIXuUYXrt54 After reading the article and watching the video, analyze the social and legal issues that relate to how to deal with violent youthful offenders who commit serious crimes while they are juveniles. Be sure to incorporate references to the assigned materials in the content your create for your response. [minimum 250 words] Juvenile delinquency within America’s society seems to have an ongoing fluctuation of opinions and areas of focus. As America continuously evolves, good or bad, the juvenile delinquency will continue to abide by the opinions that society …show more content…
The overall focus seems to be centered on punishment and retribution based on the social condemning of violent juvenile offenders rather than on preventing recidivism (Bajaj, et. al., 2016). Moreover, with strict standards and the proper imposition of the sentence imposed on the juvenile, he or she would likely be receptive to different forms of rehabilitation. Although it remains a well-known fact that no two people are the same, giving a juvenile offender the capability to learn from his or her mistakes or to engage in some sort of rehabilitative means prior to ruling out a lifetime of freedom, seems to be a better approach in maintaining the overall safety and sanctity of our society. Reference: Bajaj, V., Bennet, J., Clines, F., Cohn, L., Downes, L., Giacomo, C., . . . . . . . . . J., Williamson, E. (2016, January 25). The Supreme Court Says Again: Juveniles Are Different [PDF]. The New York Times. Elrod, P. PhD, & Ryder, R. S., JD. (2014). Juvenile Justice: A Social, Historical, and Legal Perspective (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning Growing Up in Prison: Juveniles Serving Life Without Parole. (2011, October 28). Retrieved April 17, 2017, from …show more content…
Michael C., 1979). Then, the respondent moved to suppress the statements and sketches that he gave during the interrogation alleging that the statements and sketches were obtained in violation of Miranda due to his request for the presence of his probationary officer denied (Fare v. Michael C., 1979). Claiming a violation of his right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment, the respondent claimed that requesting his the presence of his probationary officer was equivalent to having an attorney present during questioning (Fare v. Michael C., 1979). Additional arguments based on the analogy in the decision of People v. Burton where the Supreme Court of California held that a minor’s request made during custodial interrogation to see his parents, constituted an invocation of the minor’s Fifth Amendment rights (Fare v. Michael C.,
The adult system’s shifts leaked into the juvenile system, causing an increase in incarcerations even when delinquency rates were declining at the time. Juvenile reform legislations prompted more compulsory sentencing and more determinate sentences for juveniles, lowering of the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction, considerable ease in obtaining waivers to adult court for juvenile prosecution, and made it easier to gain access to juvenile records as well. Furthermore, it led to greater preoccupation with chronic, violent offenders, which in turn led to a redirection of resources for their confinement. Thereby, the absence of reliable criteria for identifying such offenders tends to stereotype all delinquents and is more likely to raise the level of precautionary confinements. These three major shifts in juvenile justice policy demonstrate the power and depth of traditional beliefs about the causes and cures of crimes in U.S. society. It also shows how the system can bend for a time in the direction of new approaches to prevention and control. Today, we are presently in a time of conservative responses where the prevailing views about crime express beliefs about prevention, retribution, and incapacitation that are profoundly rooted in our
Within the last five years, violent offenses by children have increased 68 percent, crimes such as: murder, rape, assault, and robbery. Honestly, with these figures, it is not surprising at all that the Juveniles Courts focus less on the children in danger, and focus more on dangerous children. This in fact is most likely the underlying reasoning behind juveniles being tried as adults by imposing harsher and stiffer sentences. However, these policies fail to recognize the developmental differences between young people and
Juvenile Justice Reforms in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov
Bartollas, Clemens and Miller, Stuart J. (2014). Juvenile justice in america (7 ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, 58-60.
Vito, Gennaro F., and Clifford E. Simonsen. Juvenile justice today. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004. Print.
The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.
juvenile justice” (Elrod & Ryder, 2011) is to detour juvenile crimes and not be so easy on
Butler, Frank (2010) ‘Extinguishing All Hope: Life-Without-Parole for Juveniles’, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 49: 4, 273-292
Arya Neelum , Ryan Liz , Sandoval Jessica, Kudma Julie . “Jailing Juveniles: The Dangers of Incarcerating Youth in Adult Jails in America: A Campaign for Youth Justice Report” The Campaign for Youth Justice Nov.2007 ebscohost. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
The historical development of the juvenile justice system in the United States is one that is focused on forming and separating trying juveniles from adult counterparts. One of the most important aspects is focusing on ensuring that there is a level of fairness and equality with respect to the cognitive abilities and processes of juveniles as it relates to committing crime. Some of the most important case legislation that would strengthen the argument in regard to the development of the juvenile justice system is related to the reform of the justice system during the turn of the 19th century. Many juveniles were unfortunately caught in the crosshairs of being tried as adults and ultimately receiving punishments not in line with their ability to understand their actions or be provided a second chance.
Jenkins Jennifer “On Punishment and Teen Killers.” Juvenile Justice Information Exchange, 2 August 2011. 7 May 2014.
Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased juvenile delinquency? Simply put, we must create a means of measuring juvenile’s level of risk and in turn, form an effective rehabilitation program that will decrease their risk level for future recidivism.
An ethical problem that exists in the field of criminal justice is the incarceration of juveniles. While juvenile incarceration has been decreasing over the past decade, it is still an ethical dilemma that many criminal justice professionals will come across. Juveniles’ brains are not fully developed, incarceration is used when not appropriate to fit the problem, and some populations are over-represented in the criminal justice system.
Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capitol crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes. Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the conception that this behavior is acceptable. Although there is some truth to these allegations, the reality of this social issue is far more complex. Therefore we ask the question, "Should childhood offenders of capitols crimes be treated as adults?"
Juvenile delinquency is one of the major social issues in the United States today. Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, is when “a violation of the law committed by a juvenile and not punishable by death or life imprisonment” (Merriam-webster.com). Although we have one justice system in America, the juvenile system differs from the adult juvenile system. Most juvenile delinquents range from as low as the age of seven to the age of seventeen. Once the delinquent or anyone turns the age of eighteen, they are considered an adult. Therefore, they are tried as an adult, in the justice system. There are many different reasons why a child would commit crime, such as mental and physical factors, home conditions, neighborhood environment and school conditions. In addition, there are a variety of effects that juvenile justice systems can either bad effects or good effects. Finally there are many different solutions that can reduce juvenile delinquency. As a result, juvenile delinquency is a major issue and the likeliness of it can be reduced. In order to reduce juvenile delinquency there has to be an understanding of the causes and the effects.