The Juvenile Justice System
By Catherine M. Davis
April 5, 2006
Are
juveniles as under control today as they were in the past? Crime plays a major
role in today’s society. The government follows the policy and has always
followed the policy that no crime goes unpunished. The controversy that
surrounds the
[1]In the
History of the Juvenile
Death Penalty
Thomas
Graunger, the first juvenile known to be executed in
The Supreme
Court decided its first juvenile case
- The seriousness and type of offense and the
manner in which it was committed.
- The sophistication and maturity of the juvenile
as determined by consideration of his or her home life, environmental
situation, emotional attitude, and pattern of living.
- The juvenile's record and history.
- The prospects for protecting the public and
rehabilitating the juvenile.
Juveniles
were guaranteed certain rights, but they still potentially faced the same
Punishments,
including capital punishment, as adults in the criminal justice system.
In the
1980’s the Supreme Court was repeatedly asked to rule on whether the execution
of a juvenile offender was permissible under the constitution. Between 1983 and
1986 the Supreme Court rejected five requests to consider the constitutionality
of imposing the death penalty on a juvenile. The chart below shows the death
penalty imposed on a juvenile. [3]
A review of individual and death penalty cases often reveals
years of trauma and deprivation prior to the commission of capital offenses.
Public investment in early intervention programs for children at the risk of
abuse with caring adults will go along way toward elimating violent crimes,
including capital offenses. The decision
whether to offer a juvenile with a capital offense and to impose the death
sentence on a juvenile offender, takes place within a system in which race is
deeply ingrained. The race of the offender might influence if not dictate, that
determination[4].
As of
The annual death sentencing rate for juvenile offenses has been declining rapidly and
Now is much less than half of the annual rate of the late 1990s.
In 1997, the majority of cases referred to juvenile court involved White youth. The proportion of referred cases involving African American youth was twice their proportion in the population. Of the estimated 1,755,100 delinquency cases referred to the nation’s juvenile courts in 1997, 66% involved White youth, 31% involved African American youth, and 3% involved youth of other races (Table 2).
|
Table 1: Racial Proportions of Youth Under Age 18, 1998 |
79% |
15% |
1% |
4% |
|
|
|
Percent of total arrests |
||||
|
Most serious offense charged |
Estimated number of juvenile arrests |
White |
African American |
Native American |
Asian |
|
Total |
2,603,300 |
71% |
26% |
1% |
2% |
|
Violent Crime Index |
112,200 |
55 |
42 |
1 |
1 |
|
Murder |
2,100 |
47 |
49 |
3 |
2 |
|
Rape |
5,300 |
59 |
39 |
1 |
1 |
|
Robbery |
32,500 |
43 |
54 |
1 |
2 |
|
Aggravated Assault |
72,300 |
61 |
37 |
1 |
2 |
|
Property Crime Index |
596,100 |
70 |
27 |
1 |
2 |
|
Burglary |
116,000 |
73 |
24 |
1 |
2 |
|
Larceny-theft |
417,100 |
70 |
26 |
1 |
2 |
|
Motor Vehicle Theft |
54,100 |
61 |
36 |
1 |
2 |
|
Arson |
9,000 |
80 |
18 |
1 |
1 |
|
Non-Index |
1,895,000 |
73 |
25 |
1 |
1 |
|
Other assaults |
237,700 |
64 |
33 |
1 |
1 |
|
Forgery and counterfeiting |
7,100 |
77 |
21 |
1 |
2 |
|
Fraud |
11,300 |
64 |
34 |
<1 |
2 |
|
Embezzlement |
1,600 |
61 |
37 |
1 |
1 |
|
Stolen property, buying, Receiving, possessing |
33,800 |
60 |
38 |
1 |
2 |
|
Vandalism |
126,800 |
80 |
17 |
1 |
1 |
|
Weapons carrying, possessing, etc. |
45,200 |
66 |
32 |
1 |
1 |
|
Prostitution |
1,400 |
56 |
43 |
1 |
1 |
|
Sex offenses (except forcible rape and
prostitution) |
15,900 |
70 |
28 |
1 |
1 |
|
Drug abuse violations |
205,800 |
66 |
32 |
1 |
1 |
|
Gambling |
1,600 |
15 |
84 |
-- |
1 |
|
Offenses against the family and child. |
10,200 |
79 |
19 |
1 |
2 |
|
Driving under the influence |
21,000 |
91 |
6 |
2 |
1 |
|
Liquor laws |
157,300 |
92 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
|
Drunkenness |
24,600 |
89 |
7 |
3 |
1 |
|
Disorderly Conduct |
183,700 |
67 |
32 |
1 |
1 |
|
Vagrancy |
2,900 |
71 |
27 |
1 |
<1 |
|
All other offenses (except traffic) |
453,000 |
73 |
25 |
1 |
2 |
|
Suspicion |
1,300 |
79 |
20 |
1 |
1 |
|
Curfew and loitering law violations |
187,800 |
71 |
27 |
1 |
1 |
|
Runaways |
165,100 |
78 |
18 |
1 |
3 |
|
Note: Detail may not add to
total due to rounding. The data does not disaggregate
Latino youth from race. In 1998, 91% of Latino youth were identified as
White. Source: Adapted from Juvenile
Arrests 1998, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(1999) and Crime in the Population Data Source: |
|||||
Juvenile Court
Processing
If the case is to be held
in a juvenile court, a petition is filed to either send the case to juvenile or
adult court. A hearing is held in which the court determines the responsibility
for the offense after witnesses are called and the facts of the case are
presented. The court must then consider whether juvenile court jurisdiction
should be waived and the case transferred to criminal court. [6]
In 1997, the majority
of cases referred to juvenile court involved White youth. The proportion of
referred cases involving African American youth was twice their proportion in
the population. Of the estimated 1,755,100 delinquency cases referred to the
nation’s juvenile courts in 1997, 66% involved White youth, 31% involved
African American youth, and 3% involved youth of other races (Table 2).
|
Table 2: Racial Proportions of the Juvenile Population
and of Referrals to Juvenile Court |
||
|
|
Percent
of |
|
|
|
Population |
Referrals |
|
white |
79% |
66% |
|
African
American |
15% |
31% |
|
Other |
5% |
3% |
|
Total |
100% |
100% |
|
Note: Details may not add to totals due
to rounding. Source: Easy Access to Juvenile Court Statistics: 1988-1997
[data presentation and analysis package]. Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (1999). |
||
The
statistics pertaining to the crimes that juveniles committed in the past proves
that a statement must be made by trying more serious juvenile offenders as
adults. First of all, minors believe, and the statistics show that the system
lets the juveniles off easy because they have not yet reached adulthood.
Teenagers feel that because they are young and innocent they can beat the system[7].
Out of the many minors who go to court for serious offenses, “over half leave
the courtroom smiling” because the judge decided for them to be prosecuted as
children which means the punishment is easy[8].
Furthermore, minors who commit serious crimes easily slip through grasp of the
judicial system. Of the 20,000 juvenile delinquency cases that went to court,
only one fourth were tried as adults in a criminal court.[9]
Also, of the 5,000 minors who stood trial for serious crimes such as murder or
attempted murder, few were convicted; therefore, the judicial system needs to
prosecute more juveniles as adults for more criminal offenses involving such
felonies as breaking and entering or auto theft[10].
Lastly, statistics illustrate that minors need a wake-up call to begin curbing
the crimes committed by minors. “Youngsters need a serious disciplinary jolt
before they can understand the bigger picture trying juveniles as adults places
an interesting impact on society. Society voices itself frequently. Grand
juries must decide whether or not there is enough evidence to indict anyone
suspected of capital crimes. When the rare occurrence of a juvenile being tried
as an adult takes place, grand juries “often focus on one or more topics of
community interest”, hence it is not uncommon for minors to escape conviction.
More juveniles must stand trial as adults for the legal system to maintain its
full effect. The opposition to prosecuting juveniles as adults believes that
the juvenile is too young to cope with the possible consequences. Those who
support trying minors as adults feel many reasons account for their beliefs. [11]
The Supreme Court abolished capital punishment
for juvenile offenders on