http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911u/juvenile-defenders
Recently, a debate has arisen in the United States over whether or not juveniles should be put in prison for life without the possibility of parole. Although the Supreme Court outlawed giving juveniles the death penalty, the United States is one of only three countries which locks children up for life.
According to an article titled “Kids Locked Up for Life” by Vince Beiser, there are at least 1755 juveniles serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. Many of these children did commit serious crimes in which they were charged as adults, such as murder but some did not. Some children were locked up for repeat offenses or being in association with a murder. And, some children who were convicted of murder had no prior offenses.
By locking these children up for life without parole, we are essentially not giving them a chance to try to change their juvenile ways and enter back into society. Scientific evidence shows that children are not fully developed in their frontal lobes which are responsible for practical decision making. Their ideas are not fully thought out and consequences are not considered. How is it fair to take away a second chance for these juveniles when they committed a stupid crime under the age of sixteen?
However, although it is easy to call this unfair for juvenile offenders, the victims of their crimes have to be considered. Take the case of Michael Brewer, the Deerfield Beach teenager who was burned alive by a group of boys after he had called the police on them for stealing his father’s bike. Brewer is clinging to life in Jackson Memorial Hospital barely conscious and covered in burns. If he had not jumped into a nearby pool, he would have been burned alive. Three of the boys will be tried as adults, facing attempted murder charges, considering Brewer’s condition does not worsen. Two other boys have been freed but are still being investigated.
These boys ruined Brewer’s life in one stupid act of violence over a stolen bike. He will have an extremely long recovery, if he ever does recover from this. They also affected the family of Brewer, who has to deal with this ordeal and await Michael’s recovery. Is it fair to weigh their rights against the rights of the Brewers who have experienced this nightmare? They face a whole fifteen years in jail for their crime, yet this poor boy has a life full of recovery and remembrance to deal with.
I do not necessarily agree with sentencing juveniles to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Yes, I feel that there are some cases in which juveniles should receive this sentence, especially in the case of murder or other extraordinary cases like the one I discussed above. Yet sometimes this punishment is too extreme. It seems like an easy solution to dealing with children who are repeat offenders. Obviously, something is wrong in which they feel the need to keep acting out through criminal actions. Instead of quickly locking them up for life, other solutions can be implemented. Also, investigations into their psychological state and family life should be performed.
Related Articles:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1012-02.htm
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/deerfield/fl-burned-teen-charges-bn-20091109,0,4241409.story
http://www3.onf.ca/blogs/kidsinjail
Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q732d0aO4yg
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There are many cases out there that deal with having to make the tough decision of whether or not to charge juveniles as adults. It is not something that I personally walk around and think about on a regular basis, but nonetheless this topic really caught my attention. I strongly agree that there are many factors that play into the decision of how to charge a child such as the circumstances, the severity, previously criminal history, the effects and outcomes, and sometimes even family and parents.
ReplyDeleteAn excuse that is often used, which is mentioned, is that juveniles do not realize the consequences and do not have enough experience or ability to think out their actions. However, does this give every kid an excuse or even one mess up? Clearly the answers to this is no. From a young age I remember learning that fire hurts and being able to conceptualize that you do not light another kid on fire, it just does not seem feasible to say that these kids did not know right from wrong in this situation.
The same goes for cases involving murder. Another case that stick out and is prominent in my mind involving the same ideas regarding charging a child as an adult vs. a juvenile is regarding the 2002 DC sniper shooting. In the fall of 2002, John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo terrorized the Maryland Virginia for nearly 3 weeks, leaving 10 dead. At the time, Malvo was 17 years old, but was the one controlling the trigger in every single shooting. However, it was said that Malve had been brainwashed by Muhammad, which ultimately helped him to avoid the death penalty. Awaiting a different fate, Muhammad was recently put to death by lethal injection, while Malvo remains in prison with no chance of parole.
I feel that by the age of 17 one should know right from wrong and in this case or any case of murder committed by a juvenile, who is able to talk and walk and communicate and especially one who attends school, should be with out a doubt tried as an adult. Whether a person is 10 or 65, murder is wrong, along with burning a person and various other crimes, and there is not explanation or excuse that should be able to plead someone’s case.