Juvenile Crime Case Study

The ultimate goal of the jurisdiction of the Missouri Courts and the practices discussed in the readings was to decrease the amount of juvenile crime that has been taking place. The jurisdiction of the Missouri courts to hear juvenile cases presumes adolescence “seventeen years of age or younger dealing with guardianship, delinquency, abuse/neglect and protection” (Missouri Revised Statues, 2015). Under the Convention of the Rights for Children, there are articles in which children have the rights to “protection, parental guidance, freedom of expression, right to education, and juvenile justice” (UNICEF). When these rights are violated or non-existent conflict arises in young and older adolescence. They break laws, get anger, and refuse authority

It’s about holding them accountable for their actions by placing them in adult jails to set an example for others, a deterrence. The problem lies in ignoring the general separation the law has in housing juveniles and adult offenders separately. Juveniles should be tried and sentenced separately because their cognitive learning and correctable behavior will be different than that of an adult. According to the Texas Law Review (2004), “Juvenile courts recognize two main kinds of juvenile offenses. Juvenile crime is simply criminal activity committed by a juvenile. Juvenile status offenses are acts that would be illegal for juvenile, such as truancy, running away from home curfew violations, smoking, drinking, and swearing. The trend of trying juveniles as adults applies only to juvenile criminal conduct, not juvenile status offenses” (Brink, 2004, p.1860). This quote helps to differentiate juvenile criminal conduct and the offenses. Criminal conduct would be punished the same if they were an adult, while the status offenses only apply to the illegal acts of the actor, in this case being a minor. This get tough on crime mentality on juveniles to decrease crimes conforms to what the jurisdiction of Missouri Courts have on juveniles by letting juveniles at the young age of fourteen get a life sentence without parole.(ex: Quantel

There is a huge need for improvement in juvenile representation that could lead to better outcome for the entire situation as a whole. The author says “the degree of punishment should be related to the individual’s state of mind, state of development, and the state of maturity” (___, 2014, p. 1118). All 3 factors should be used in determining the punishment and imposing the sentence that should be ruled for each individual defendant. The adolescent Intervention and Diversion Program (AIDP) directed by the author, “represents teenagers ages thirteen to eighteen charged in the adult court system with misdemeanors and felonies. Specially trained lawyers work closely with trained social workers to provide legal representation and education, foster care, mental health, and policy advocacy”(_____,2014,p.1118). The goal being to expand beyond what is usually being presented in courtrooms, putting the same amount of focus on the individual and the crime. Analyzing the lifestyle of a juvenile could form answers to the questions surrounding influences and the impact the crime had on them. In the Supreme Court case of Miller v. Alabama, “the courts [were able to] recognize that adolescents are less blameworthy nor the offenses they commit because they are less capable of evaluating the possible outcomes of different courses of actions and they are more vulnerable to external