The unfaltering dissension about sentencing juveniles to life in prison without parole has yielded opposition in the criminal justice system and dysfunction towards the young lives facing unsettled, extreme punishment for their mitigating crimes. While this particular topic can branch to very detailed discussions in divergent aspects such as: socially, politically, scientifically, and morally, it should be eliminated to only two characteristics: is it fair and is it right? Although it seems painless and facile to act on impulse when punishing juvenile criminals severely, the consequences are ineffective and adverse to the needs of the victims, the development of adolescent offenders, and the primary function of the criminal justice system. …show more content…
The continuing behavior of the criminal justice system to disregard expectations to a case is inconsiderate and unsuitable for the defendants on trial. One of the superlative purposes of the justice system is to serve as a competent platform for defendants to have the right to a fair trial. In the case of Nathan Ybanez, the ongoing incest, child abuse from Nathan’s mother was overlooked, “I try to get her to talk about whatever it was that was making her sad, and a lot of times it would involve me coming and giving her hugs and staying in bed with her and letting her unload. And a few times that evolved into her doing sexual things to me that she shouldn't have been doing" (FRONTLINE). By definition, self-defense is the reasonable force to defend or protect oneself if believed he or she is in danger. Informing child protective services and notifying others about the abuse in his household resulted in no action, to fourteen-year-old Ybanez, the only way out of the atrocious sexual abuse from his own mother was to murder her. This is not to say Ybanez should go unpunished, …show more content…
Teenagers lack a mature frontal lobe where cognitive thought processes, emotions, and reasoning occur. Paul Thompson, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Medicine discovered,“These frontal lobes, which inhibit our violent passions, rash actions, and regulate our emotions, are vastly immature throughout the teenage years.” Because of this biological factor, teenagers, involuntarily, act upon impulse and temporary emotions. Unlike the systematic algorithm adult murderers use, the killings from teenagers are usually abrupt, personal, disorganized, and chaotic. Most homicides by adolescents are not conducted with malice of forethought, yet they are punished to the same standard as adult killers who commit first-degree murders. When young offenders enter the criminal system they are underdeveloped mentally and physically, they are never given the chance to reimburse as a mature, cultivated, and cultured adult before and during their sentence. Because of this, we do not see much anecdotal evidence of teen offenders evolving and thriving after prison. This lack of affirmation generates the common belief that there must be a genetic correlation with crime and that there is an absolutely nothing that can change a criminal into a law-abiding citizen. But because the general public
Mrs. Smith English 111 Jan. 28, 2023 Rhetorical analysis: “Legal system has never had an answer for violent kids” In this article, the author, Stephen L. Carter, goes into detail on the reasons why the legal system is confused or conflicted on whether they should or shouldn’t charge young children below the age of 10 for their crimes. This article is somewhat controversial because of the recent case that happened in Virginia with the 6-year-old, but he uses this to his advantage to get his point across and to try and shed some light on the way the justice system has and continues to handle these cases in the past. Not only is the topic something controversial, but his opinion on what they could do and how to solve it is also controversial.
Nathen Ybanez age 16, parents sexualy, emotionaly and physically abused their son till that day of Nathans crime.
Imagine a child of six years committing a heinous crime, and the child is sentenced to life in prison without the slightest possibility of parole. Countless people will argue that the child should not be sentenced to life because his/her mind is not entirely developed, and the juvenile has the ability to be transformed into a preferred (productive?) individual of society. This is a greater preference because children are the next generation and should be salvaged rather than become a “lost cause”. However, numerous people will argue otherwise if a teenager committed the same heinous crime as the child.
“This theory postulates that the gap between social/emotional maturity, and greater affiliation with other delinquent peers via social mimicry” (Cruise et al., 2008). This theory also focuses on the neurodevelopmental characteristics and progression within the lives of adolescent’s. As mentioned before, Cruise, Fernandez, McCoy, Guy, Colwell, and Douglas, quote Cauffman and Steinberg stating, “‘this growing body of research has brought up both the developmental theoretical framework, and operationalization of that framework, to examine adolescents’ specific developmental capacities deemed crucial to participation in the legal processes’ (Cauffman & Steinberg, 1995),” (Cruise et al., 2008). Meaning that there must be an understanding during the juvenile interrogation and the juvenile justice system, that adolescent’s are cognitively different than adults. The combination of cognitive, social, and emotional factors influence the “maturity of judgment” through age-related factors that differentiate an adolescent’s decision-making from that of an
Due to the harsh treatments incurred in adult prisons, many youth have mental health needs which fail to be meet in an adult facility. Consequently, these harsh treatments cause youth to be more likely to re-offend. After reviewing these facts, it makes absolute sense to retain juveniles in the juvenile system instead of the adult system. The youth is our future; therefore, it is our duty as American citizens to protect that
Not only did the prosecutors charge the young teenager with second degree murder, they also tried him as an adult. Haberman explains how if this had happened 20 years previous, the media would have seized in how America was to soon be taken over by “super-predators.” In the so called ‘super-predator era’, children incarceration rates were expected to rise drastically and people across the country were expecting panic and bloodbath to conquer the land. Although, Haberman is quick to debunk this hypothesis and argues that instead “murders committed by those ages 10 to 17 fell by roughly two-thirds from 1994 to 2011, according to statistics kept by the Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention” (Haberman). Although, data doesn’t stop states from issuing children life sentences and trying teenagers as young as 13-years-old as adults.
This comment then defines prominent societal and criminal justice considerations as they relate to abused children who kill, and examines cases that move toward a more appropriate legal responses by remaining cognizant of these considerations in classifying offenses and imposing corresponding sentences. In conclusion, this argues that classifying parricidal killings as voluntary manslaughter acknowledges the criminal nature of both child abuse and homicide striking an appropriate balance among societal goals and theories of criminal justice. It then emphasizes that upon finding of guilt, whether by trial or plea, courts must fashion appropriate sentences that adequately and effective balance the competing interests of the child abuse-parricide
Those still aren’t good enough reasons to murder someone, but another reason young people commit such crimes is that of the psychology of their brains. People under the age of 18 aren’t fully developed and don’t think or function as properly as adults do. Their brains don’t think about the logic of situations, just feelings, which is why most juvenile offenders don’t really realize what they are doing or think about the consequences of their actions. In order to understand what is going on in their brains and to get juveniles to change the way they think, they need child rehabilitation, but instead, receive adult rehabilitation. These juvenile offenders are treated like adults because they made adult decisions when instead they should be given attention and support to turn them into better people.
The age of accountability or the “age of innocence” is a term that refers to children being an inappropriate age to face consequences for their actions. In the story of the six year old male student bringing a weapon to school and shooting his classmate, our legal system claims that he is of an age that will not allow him to face legal repercussions. In this case study, examples of why this theory of innocence in children younger than 7 is a legitimate stance will be discussed. Most states have provisions for determining how a crime was tried in the state. In 16 states, the minimum age for seeing juveniles in a criminal court was fourteen years of age.
The case assessment of Brianna Lopez begins with her birth on February 14, 2002 in a New Mexico hospital. After leaving the hospital, Brianna resided in Las Cruces, New Mexico with her unwed parents, Andrew “Andy” Walters, 21, and Stephanie Lopez, 19. There were also four other adults and one child, Andy and Stephanie’s 18 month old son, living in the home (State v. Walters, 2007). Among these adults was Brianna’s uncle, Steven Lopez. Shortly after her arrival home, Baby Brianna experienced extreme physical, verbal, and sexual abuse from her parents and uncle.
Collier appears to have good intentions when she argues her case for changing the juvenile system; however, her argument seems to be limited to her own experiences and a handful of statistics to support her cause. Collier’s argument seems to balance on the belief that juvenile criminals will be deterred by harsher punishment, a notion that has been shown not to be true. When provided with the appropriate measures, juveniles have been shown to avoid recidivism at a rate that is significantly higher than juveniles sentenced through adult court. Collier is right when she argues for updating the juvenile justice system; however, her solution is far from correct when one considers the moral implications of sentencing, young, still developing minds
Childhood abuse has been given varying levels of blame in the development of serial killers. De Becker (1997) quoted Ressler’s research and stated that “100 percent [of serial killers] had been abused as children, either with violence, neglect, or humiliation” (p. 55). Ressler and Shachtman (1992) report that, “over 40 percent of the [serial] murderers reported being physically beaten and abused in their childhoods. More than 70 percent said they had witnessed or been part of sexually stressful events when young…” (p. 85).
Juvenile Incarceration: Should Juvenile Offenders be Rehabilitated or Incarcerated? Working Thesis: While many believe juvenile offenders should be incarcerated for their crimes since regardless of their age, they are still committing a crime and deserve to be punished, however, juveniles should in fact be rehabilitated rather than incarcerated due to the negative effects prison has on young offenders’ physical and mental wellbeing, the prison system’s failure to deter juveniles from reoffending, and because juveniles are less likely to make rational decisions about things that affect them long term due to their brains not being completely developed. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in 2014, over one
“New Orleans prosecutors are seeking life without parole [for juvenile offenders] in half of all cases; in West Baton Rouge Parish, 100 percent,” (“Justice for the Youngest Inmates”). Whenever a minor is found guilty of committing a crime, he or she must go through the processes of the juvenile justice system. There has been much controversy over how young criminals should be punished and corrected for breaking the law. The goal of the juvenile justice system is to rectify the mistakes that youths have committed in order to produce functional, well-mannered members of society. However, juveniles are often treated poorly after being tried and come out of the detention facilities in a worse condition than when they entered.
Our Juvenile Justice System is broken. We live in a society that should be concerned with the way it manages teenagers who are deviant. Today, our juveniles are viewed as individuals to be feared rather than rehabilitated. Rarely are issues with juvenile crime and punishment treated under the rehabilitative philosophical basis parens patriae, instead youths are sentenced in juvenile facilities or even adult prisons for status offenses. They are placed in a community with expert criminals, and as a result, continue the lifelong journey of crime.