“When a juvenile commits a heinous crime, the State can assert forfeiture of the most basic liberties, but the State cannot extinguish one’s life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity.” - (U. S. Supreme Court: Roper v. Simmons- No. 03-633, 2005)
In Roper v. Simmons Courts observed that juveniles are not adults and lack responsibility and can easily fall into peer pressure. (Champion, 2013) There are many different factors that attribute to juvenile offenders’ actions, most are not entirely under their control. Three main factors:
1) Brain development hinders juvenile’s ability to refrain from impulsive behavior
2) Most youthful offenders have been brought up in an un-nurturing environment
3) The possibility of the death penalty does not have much effect on the juveniles.
Medical research indicates that the part of the brain that controls impulsiveness in adolescents is not fully developed until the early twenties, thus juveniles are desensitizing to dangerous behavior. It’s unfortunate that most juveniles who commit violent crimes are prone to self-destruction.
A child who is brought up in a broken home lacking nurturing, love and discipline is more likely to commit violent crimes: the lack of maturity and the ability to understand the repercussions of their actions such as a possible death sentence is a concept that is foreign to juveniles. (Streib, 2004)
Considering the above factors, administering the death penalty to juveniles should be regarded as cruel and unusual punishment. When a juvenile commits a heinous crime the juvenile should be punished to the extent necessary, but not put to death. Putting the juvenile to death does not help anyone, it does not ease the recovery of the vic...
... middle of paper ...
...ddle River, N. J.: Pearson Education, 2013. Print.
Ortiz, Adam. "Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Juvenile Death Penalty Adolescence, Brain Development and Legal Culpability." Juvenile Justice Center (Jan. 2004): n. pag. American Bar Association. Jan. 2004. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. .
Crocker, Phyllis L. "Childhood Abuse and Adult Murder: Implications for the Death Penalty."Articles and Essays (1999): n. pag. Http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/. 01 Jan. 1999. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1278&context=fac_articles
Rosenblatt, Roger. "The Killing of Kayla." Time Magazine 05 Mar. 2000: n. pag. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. ..
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
Hale, Robert L. A Review of Juvenile Executions in America. Vol. 3. Wales: Edwin Mellen, 1997. Print.
The sentencing of underage criminals has remained a logistical and moral issue in the world for a very long time. The issue is brought to our perspective in the documentary Making a Murderer and the audio podcast Serial. When trying to overcome this issue, we ask ourselves, “When should juveniles receive life sentences?” or “Should young inmates be housed with adults?” or “Was the Supreme Court right to make it illegal to sentence a minor to death?”. There are multiple answers to these questions, and it’s necessary to either take a moral or logical approach to the problem.
Secondly we will take a short look at the two major court cases that dealt with this issue in the United States. Next this paper will present the factual statistics of the death penalty for juveniles and also take a look at our country's stance on the issue in the international arena. We will then spend a short time looking at some views on the juvenile death penalty, reasons for the death penalty itself, and the arguments for and against the death pe... ... middle of paper ... ...
Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is entirely eliminating the use of the life without parole sentence for juveniles, regardless of the nature of the crime being charged.
...to the article Startling Finds on Teenage Brains by Paul Thompson from Sacramento Bee, published on May 25, 2001 “...brain cells and connections are only being lost in areas controlling impulses, risk-taking, and self-control.”, during this loss of brain tissue, the juvenile cannot their impulses which can cause erratic behavior. Juveniles may not even mean to act this way they just do. It may even be something that they are necessarily aware of. Or they may be aware of it but do not notice the need to change. Juveniles just need a something to keep them out of trouble and not everyone has one.
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
Jenkins Jennifer “On Punishment and Teen Killers.” Juvenile Justice Information Exchange, 2 August 2011. 7 May 2014.
References Glick, B. (1998) No Time to Play: Youthful Offenders in Adult Correctional Systems. American Correctional Association Wilkerson, I (1996) “Death Sentence at Sixteen Rekindles Debate on Justice for Juveniles.” New York Times, November Butts, J.A. and Snyder, H. (1997) “The Youngest Delinquents: Offenders Under the Age of 15,” Juvenile Justice Bulletin (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice) Lefevre, P.S., “Professor Grapples with Execution of Juveniles.” National Catholic Reporter Snyder, A. “Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders” (1997) National Center for Juvenile Justice
Kids are like sponges, they have the capacity of absorbing everything that is around them. If a kid grows with an unstable family and around a bad environment they will only become as bad as the individuals around them. This is because they do not know any better. This factor should be put into thought when a juvenile receives a sentence for a crime, especially if the crime was something as big as murder.
Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the idea 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 capital crimes be treated as adults?" To begin with, numerous reasons for why a child acts in the manner he exhibits and why he continues to exert such dangerous and even fatal schemes. Recent research shows that factors ranging from inherited personality traits to chemical imbalances and damages suffered in the womb can increase the odds that a child will become violent (Johnson 234).
For instance, juveniles do not deserve life sentences because their brain isn’t fully developed yet and lack awareness of their actions. In the article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson, he explains the development of the brain and how in some situations the brain isn’t ready and it can affect the person. This effect in divergent ways; psychologically and emotionally. Thompson's article introduces the case of Nathaniel Brazill, at age 14, charged with second degree murder, trial as an adult and sentenced to life in prison without parole. After some serious research, it has shown that as many other juveniles who have committed a crime they are “far from adulthood”.
Today?s court system is left with many difficult decisions. One of the most controversial being whether to try juveniles as adults or not. With the number of children in adult prisons and jails rising rapidly, questions are being asked as to why children have been committing such heinous crimes and how will they be stopped. The fact of the matter is that it is not always the children's fault for their poor choices and actions; they are merely a victim of their environment or their parents. Another question asked is how young is too young. Children who are too young to see an R rated film unaccompanied are being sent to adult prisons. The only boundaries that seem to matter when it comes to being an adult are laws that restrain kids from things such as alcohol, pornography, and other materials seen as unethical. Children that are sent to adult prison are going to be subjected to even more unprincipled ideas and scenes. When children can be sent to jail for something as minor as a smash and grab burglary, the judicial system has errors. The laws that send juveniles to adult prisons are inhumane, immoral, and unjust. Kids are often incompetent, which leads to unfair trials. Adult prisons are also very dangerous for minors, and in many cases this leads to more juvenile crimes.
Eaton, Judy, Tony Christensen. “Closure and its myths: Victims’ families, the death penalty, and the closure argument.” International Review of Victimology, Vol 20(3).Sep, 2014. : pp. 327-343.
In today’s generation there are many children and teens that commit crimes to satisfy their self being. Every day we see in the news about the reasons why children or teens commit crimes like murder or homicide. Sentencing juveniles to life in prison is not a right response to prevent homicide and serious murder, because their brains are not fully develop and the bad environment they live in. Teenagers or children need to be remain unformed of preventing crimes in today’s society. With this said, juvenile’s mental brains, backgrounds and growth are the reasons why they are not proficient to maintain themselves in a prison cell.