Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to childrens rights
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
1. Do you think most juveniles are competent to stand trial in criminal court? To answer this question we must first look at what would make a juvenile incompetent to stand trial in a criminal court. When a youth's competence is questioned the court will order a forensic mental health evaluation of the youth by a qualified professional, often a psychologist or psychiatrist and the evaluation assesses the youth's mental health and intellectual capacities ("Overview | Collaborative For Change," n.d.) Most importantly, it includes a detailed inquiry into the specific abilities associated with competence to stand trial-what the youth understands, knows, believes, and can do that is relevant for participating in a defense ("Overview | Collaborative …show more content…
For Change," n.d.). So knowing what is evaluated, I don't believe that initially most juveniles are competent to stand trial in criminal court. I do however, believe that most juveniles can become competent with guidance from the court system so that they may face the criminal court for the crimes they committed. Some state currently offer juvenile competence remediation programs that help prepare a juvenile for trial. The current problem with this is that there are no published models for juvenile competence remediation and almost no research on the current efforts ("Overview | Collaborative For Change," n.d.). Juvenile competence remediation does and should have limits and regulations. The examiners conducting the competency exam should consider how long successful intervention is expected to take in order to get the juvenile to be considered competent. If remediation is expected to take a long time then the juvenile should be classified as not competent. I realize that some juveniles even after receiving remediation still won't be competent to stand trial due to mental issues, age or maturity and those are the few that I believe should be dealt with in other ways. So while I believe that most juveniles aren't initially competent to stand trial in criminal court, I do believe most of them can become competent with court remediation. 2. Should parents, custodians or guardians of youths be actively involved in a youth's rehabilitation? Why or why not? I believe that in order to have any success with rehabilitating a youth or making them a contributing member of the community it requires the mutual support of the juvenile justice system and the parents, custodians or guardians.
So the answer to the question is yes they should be part of the juvenile's rehabilitation process. There can be some obstacles making the process of getting a parent or guardian involved difficult or sometimes just impossible. Some of these obstacles include but not limited to the parents work schedule conflicting with rehabilitation appointments, inability to take time off without being fired, financial strain of taking work off, lack of transportation, the lacking of any good parenting skills or they just don't have any interest in dealing with their children. Getting parents and guardians involved throughout the whole process and not just the rehabilitation often leads to positive outcomes for youth, including those with behavioral health needs ("Family Involvement in the Juvenile Justice System | Collaborative For Change," n.d.). It should also be the responsibility of the juvenile justice system to get these parents, custodians or guardians involved. This could be done by supplying the parents with information on how the process works, what is expected of them and the best approach to helping with the rehabilitation. Some parent lack the education or knowledge and by supplying them with the needed information not only builds a better team relationship with the juvenile justice system but gives the youth the best chances of rehabilitation. I strongly believe that those parents, custodians or guardians that can be involved in their youth's rehabilitation are a key factor in increasing the odds of the youth successfully being rehabilitated. I also believe that the courts should whenever possible get the parents involved in the process and offer any necessary training, education or support if needed by the parents or
guardians
5. The factors that I think juries should take into account when they sentence juveniles, is there; age, crime, sciological state, home life, and even parents. Juries should take the age of of juvinelies into consideration, if they are olden to know right from wrong and the crime was serious I beleieve they should be judged like adulyts. Also though juries need to take the sciological state of the juvineall into account. As well as if they come from a bad home with horrible parents.
Juvenile court is a special court that deals with under age defendants that are charged with crimes, who are neglected, or out of their parent’s control. The average age of the Defendants are younger than 18, but juvenile court doesn’t have jurisdiction in cases in which a minor is charged as an adult. The procedure of juvenile court is to involve parents or social workers and probation officers in order to achieve positive results and prevent minors from future crimes. However, serious crimes and repeated offenses can result in the juvenile offender being sentenced to a prison, with a transfer to a state prison when they reach adulthood. According to the film “Prison States”, Christel Tribble’s was a 15-year-old from Kentucky who was diagnosed
Parents are referred to the program by Children and Family Services, juvenile probation officers, or sent by the juvenile court judge. Each jurisdiction of the diversion program determines what process the family of the juvenile will participate in. Parenting programs help families address issues that either initiated or reinforced the delinquent behavior...
Some things, should to be immediately done, such as treating parents with empathy and respect, understanding that they have rights and should be informed of those rights. Some of the apparent rights of the parents are fair treatment with dignity and respect, the rights to know what the courts expects of them, and informed of all scheduled court dates and appointments, which could be inserted in a pamphlet. The overall benefit would be to work together in a collaborative effort to help reduce the recidivism rate among youth and lessen the inconvenient burden of the parents, community and juvenile justice system.
The criminal trial process is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society to a great extent. For the law to be effective, the criminal trial process must reflect what is accepted by society to be a breach of moral and ethical conduct and the extent to which protections are granted to the victims, the offenders and the community. For these reasons, the criminal trial process is effectively able to achieve this in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury system.
The criminal justice system takes on a pivotal role in pursuing and preventing crimes in society. When a suspect is caught and then faced with charges for a violent crime, they legally have the right to a fair trial. In order for a criminal proceeding to successfully take place, the defendant must be fully aware of their surroundings, have a basic understanding of court procedures, as well as being capable of defending their one case. Competency to stand trial (CST) is essential for maintaining fairness in the courtroom and producing a just verdict. However, if a defendant is unable to understand legal proceedings due to mental illness or impairment, they must be thoroughly assessed and evaluated before declared incompetent to stand trial. Carrying out a case with a defendant who lacks mental capacity causes numerous issues because the individual is incapable of supplying their lawyers with information regarding their crime or any of the witness testimonies at trial. Lack of comprehensible communication between a defendant and attorney forces an ineffective defense in the case. Mental disturbances in the defendant that may cause disorderly conduct in the court room are considered disruptive and weaken the authority of the legal system. Supreme Court cases that have dealt with competency to stand trial issues over the years have made significant rulings, which have stressed the importance of identifying whether or not a defendant is in fact incompetent.
The issue of juvenile competency began to form in the early 1990's from a dramatic increase in violent offenses by juveniles. A juvenile offender can be technically classified as "incompetent" for a number of reasons: developmental immaturity, mental illness, too young, or in the state of emotional shock. A criminal defendant MUST be capable of meaningful participation in his defense and must be able to make decisions, such as exercising or waiving important rights. Further, the criminal defendant must posses the ability to understand the charges, the trial process, other participants' rol...
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 juvenile 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
The Miranda warnings stem from a United States Court’s decision in the case, Miranda v. Arizona. There are two basic conditions that must be met for Miranda warnings to be required: the suspect must be in official police custody and the suspect must be under interrogation. The suspect goes through a booking process after an arrest. The suspect will have a bond hearing shortly after the completion of the booking process or after arraignment. The arraignment is the suspect’s first court appearance to officially hear the charges filed against him or her and to enter a plea. The preliminary hearing or grand jury proceeding determines if there is substantial evidence for the suspect to be tried for the crime charged. In this essay, I will identify and describe at least four rights afforded criminal defendants at the arrest stage and during pretrial. I will analyze the facts presented and other relevant factors in the scenario provided. I will cite legal authority to support my conclusions.
Juveniles deserve to be tried the same as adults when they commit certain crimes. The justice systems of America are becoming completely unjust and easy to break through. Juvenile courts haven’t always been known to the everyday person.
If so many offenders who are non-violent are being transferred in order to be treated as adults, what are their chances of rehabilitation? The answer is they don’t have any because they were not even allowed the opportunity. How can a juvenile offender be expected to improve when the decision to charge them as an adult is an option that could easily be taken even if the offense committed is not the serious act the transfer process is meant to combat? In the 1997 article, Justice for Children: How Do We Get There?, the argument is that … “the juvenile court will not survive if it takes on the challenge and the ‘heat’ of attempting to deal with older children who commit serious crimes” … (Geraghty, p. 199). That insinuates that transferring juveniles who have committed serious enough crimes is in the best interest of the juvenile court system, not the juveniles who are at risk of being locked up. However, transferring a child to adult court is basically saying that the individual is any beyond help the juvenile court can provide and does deserve to be given the chances at possibly improving and being rehabilitated. How can the title of juvenile justice system be claimed by a court system that is not serving the children who just happen to be the very reason for its
A large burden is placed on families when youth are incarcerated. There is not only the pain of being separated, but it also prevents families from being involved in the juvenile’s life, which is a barrier to the child’s recovery, future, and
Since the establishment of the first juvenile court in Chicago Illinois for over 100 years (Grisso, 199,813) ago, psychologists have continued to show a strong presence in juvenile proceedings and assist the juvenile justice system, as well as young people involved in it. a special court and the justice system for minors, partly in response to the recognition that adolescents, while clearly shows greater cognitive, emotional and behavioral capacities were established than their younger counterparts, do not have many of the skills that adults and relevant to the legal decision making and criminal responsibility (Otto and Borum, 2004) demonstrators. As a result, the juvenile court was to consider the criminal behavior of minors in context of development, with a greater emphasis on rehabilitation and decreased attention on the punishment (Zimring, 2000). Since the juvenile court was to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment, the dramatic changes in the landscape of juvenile justice in 1966 and 1967, changing forever the denial of constitutional guarantees for minors. In its decisions in Kent v. United States (1966) and In re Gault (1967), the Supreme Court of the United States asked if the ideal rehabilitation of the
Children experience parental incarceration under many differing circumstances and behavioral effects vary according to which parent was incarcerated, prior living arrangements, the quality of parent-child relationships before incarceration, the child’s age at the time of incarceration, the nature and length of the sentence, alternative care arrangements, contact with the incarcerated parent, and how other family members cope with the event (Murray, et al. 2012). Because the circumstances of parental incarceration are varied, the attitudes and behavior of children varies as well. Mike Hubbard, District Judge for Polk County, discussed that when a family member is awaiting sentencing it is more likely that he looks at how the family can support the offender, not how the offender helps support the family. While this makes sense for the best interest of the offender to be rehabilitated successfully, if the family life isn’t conducive for...
I believe that transferring a juvenile from juvenile court to criminal court (adult) is appropriate in certain cases. I personally see no issue trying and punishing a juvenile in adult court and prison if the sanctions under the juvenile system will not either ensure public safety, or the juvenile is not responsive to the “rehabilitation” methods of the juvenile justice system. The basic premise of the juvenile system is to rehabilitate and do what is in the best interest of the child (Cornell, 2016; Scialabba, 2016). When a juvenile reaches a point in criminality and mental capacity, adult sanctions may very well be what are needed to protect the community at large. Studies have shown that the deterrence of being transferred to adult court is not a factor for crime reduction and in many instances recidivism goes up (UCLA Law School, 2010). The inference here is that transferring to adult court is to punish, not rehabilitate, leading me to believe the retribution is for the victims and society, and punishment for the offender.