Deterrence and Punishment with Juveniles

Deterrence and Punishment with Juveniles

                Can juveniles really be deterred when it comes to the Criminal Justice System? Nathaniel Abraham was 11- years-old when he was tried for murder as an adult.  The Judge in the case chose to sentence Nathaniel to a juvenile sentence only, but the judge could have given him an adult sentence sending him to prison instead of a juvenile detention facility. 

                Over 50% of Americans back in 2001 believed that crime and not the age of the defendant should determine the sentencing (Reaves, 2001).   It is important to note that scientists speculate that the prefrontal lobe of the brain, which they believe may play a crucial role in the inhibition of inappropriate behavior, doesn’t fully form until the age of 20 (Reaves, 2001).  I think this is very important when dealing with juveniles and crime.  Rehabilitation is better for a juvenile than direct-filing the juvenile as an adult.  

Juveniles now are more mature and understand violence more so than 50 years ago.  There is no doubt with what is on the television today that our children know more than we did.  They are subjected to more violence and shootings on a regular basis.  I don’t think treating our children like adults is the answer.  Diversion programs for non-violent crimes may be part of the answer.  Holding children accountable for their actions and causing them to “work” for their mistakes, and by “work” I mean community service hours.  I don’t mean 20 hours of community service hours, I mean a substantial amount of community service hours.   I think another way that may impact the juvenile the defendant is to have them be involved in victim impact panels.  I believe that having them sit face-to-face with victims may help them to understand what kind of emotional impact that a crime has on the actual victim.  Victims are not faceless, and that they are actual people

References

Reaves, J. (2001, May 17). TIME. Retrieved from Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently?: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,110232,00.html

Interrogations and Deception

Interrogations and Deception

Most people are aware that a person under arrest must be given his or her Miranda Warning.  What I don’t think is so obvious is how many people actually waive their rights once they are actually informed of them.  Why do suspects open up to detectives and officers like they are talking to their close friend? Interrogations and the deception that goes along with them are set up for the suspect to do just that.  Open up and confess. Unfortunately, the use of deception can actually lead to false confessions.  Types of deception used in police interrogation include bluff, trickery, and false evidence.  A Supreme Court case that regulates false statements made to suspects is Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731 (1969).  Frazier specifically deals with trickery and false statements, and the Supreme Court held that Mr. Frazier’s confession was, in fact, admissible.  However, there is still a debate in different jurisdictions when it comes to fabricated evidence such as lab reports.   The question we must ask ourselves is how far is too far? Is a fabricated DNA test okay as long as it gets a confession? What happens if that confession is a false confession and it puts someone in prison for 20 years? I personally believe one innocent person is one too many.  

References

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.

Women and Incarceration

Women and Incarceration

                According to the ACLU there are more than 200,000 women incarcerated and more than one million on probation and parole in the U.S. (ACLU American Civil Liberties Unioni, n.d.).    Women involved in the Criminal Justice system in such a large number is quite surprising.  If one stops to think about it, the far reaching effects of those numbers are astounding.  If those women have children or are pregnant that puts things in a whole new perspective.  A pregnant woman in prison or jail changes the dynamics of her incarceration.  In some instances a woman gives birth in shackles and then is forced to give her baby away.  Also, when women are incarcerated their children are without their mother.   The same of course if their father is sent to jail/prison, but it seems that more stigma is placed on the child if the mother is absent.  It is important to mention that between 40-88% of the women involved in the Criminal Justice System have been abused.  There are two reasons for this.  The first is that the abuse leads to drug abuse. The second is that it leads to violence (Moss, n.d.).  Unfortunately, the nature of their incarceration leaves them open to even more abuse, and the Prison Rape Act of 2003 (PREA) is designed to protect those in custody.  Unfortunately, the PREA has been geared toward the male population.  However, there are proposed standards that were submitted to Attorney General Holder to address the needs of women (ACLU American Civil Liberties Unioni, n.d.).

The please see the link below of stories on women in jail/prison. 

http://womenandprison.org/motherhood/

References

ACLU American Civil Liberties Unioni. (n.d.). Retrieved from Women in Prison: https://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/women-prison

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.

Moss, A. (n.d.). www.wcl.american.edu. Retrieved from The Prison Rape Elimination Act: Implications for Women and Girls: http://www.wcl.american.edu/endsilence/documents/PREAimplicationsforwomenandgirls.pdf

                  

Probation and Guns

Probation and Guns

                Probation in the past was meant for those that were low risk and in need of less supervision than those that are sent to jail or prison.  Now with more violent and high-risk offenders being placed on probation it changes the dynamics for probation officers.  Probation officers have to do domicile checks, and now, more than ever, they could be walking into a situation that could put them in danger.  So should probation officers now be allowed to carry guns like police officers? If probation officers are allowed to carry guns, then they would now have to go through firearms training just like police officers.  Also, would it change the way probationers see the probation officers? Would probationers look at the probation officers as those trying to put them back in jail, instead of helping them to succeed on probation?  Probation officers not only have a role in keeping the probationer on track to follow the conditions of probation, but also as a social worker of sorts.  Safety is paramount, so is there a middle-ground? 

American Parole and Probation Position Statement:

http://www.appanet.org/eweb/Dynamicpage.aspx?site=APPA_2&webcode=IB_PositionStatement&wps_key=e2e80331-3bed-4d64-a044-ea98ee53bd17

Bibliograhy:

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.

               

Bail and Discrimination

     Typically when a person comes before a Judge requesting bail the factors that are used include: marital status, work, length of residence, family, criminal history, ties to the community, and whether the accused has appeared for court before.  Ms. Banks spoke about a study that revealed "that defendants with lower education and income were less likely to get bail and more likely to receive onerous bail terms” (Banks, 2013).  Also, when white and black defendants with the same education, background, and income, the white defendants were more likely to receive bail.  It is also interesting to note that a prior criminal record counted more against black defendants, but white defendants were treated more seriously when looking at the seriousness of the offense. 

     As to gender bias when it comes to bail, according to an article written by Dr. Johnson and Dr. Turner stated in their article that women were more likely to be granted pre-trial terms and lower bail than males.  Dr. Johnson and Dr. Turner went a step further using information from the Detroit’s Recorder’s Court that white males and females and black females were more likely released prior to trial  (Turner & Johnson, 2006). 

     I would also like to mention the disparity in bail when it comes to the rich and the poor.  To give a millionaire bail of a million dollars, of course he/she will be able to make that amount without blinking an eye.  However, to give a poor person a bond of a thousand could, in essence, be the same as no bail at all.   So should there be an additional category for discrimination now for the indigent?  I have attached an article that may be an interesting read.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/bail-equals-jail-equation-punishes-new-york-poorest-article-1.472123

References:

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.

Turner, K., & Johnson, J. B. (2006). The Effect of Gender on the Judicial Pretrial Decision of Bail Amount Set. Federal Probation a journal of correctional philosphy and practice. Retrieved from http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/federalcourts/pps/fedprob/2006-06/gender.html

Attorney-Client Confidentiality

Attorney-client relationship is based upon the attorney’s ability to keep the client’s affairs confidential, and the attorney actually has an ethical obligation to do so.  At what point does that ethical obligation of confidentiality become negated by something that the client does.  Client perjury is a difficult issue when it comes to attorney-client confidentiality.  What does an attorney do when a criminal client gives a set of facts for the majority of the representation, and when the client gets on the stand starts to give a complete different set of facts?  The attorney knows that the client is committing perjury due to other circumstances with the case.  Good question.  The attorney could at that point attempt to remediate by asking the court to allow the attorney to have a minute with the client.  The attorney could also side bar and explain that he/she needs to withdraw at this time due to a personal conflict and ask how would the court like to proceed.  I believe it is an extremely difficult situation to be in when a client has decided to commit perjury without fully realizing the consequences of those actions. 

If a client comes to an attorney for help in furtherance of a criminal act the confidentiality between the attorney and client is negated.  In other words, if a client comes into an attorney’s office and tells the attorney that she has put poison in her boyfriend’s dinner and he eats at 6pm.  The time is currently 1pm.  The attorney has a duty to report the information to prevent future harm.  However, if the boyfriend had already eaten the dinner, and became ill.  The girlfriend was then subsequently arrested, and retained an attorney.  She then told the attorney that she had put the poison in his dinner that information would be subject to attorney-client privilege. 

Bibliography

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.

Entrapment

Entrapment

Has anyone ever watched the cable television show where they leave the keys in the car and the car doors unlocked and the police are waiting by for someone to steal the car? That is what the police call a bait car. Is it entrapment when someone (not the owner) gets in and tries to drive off with the vehicle? How about leaving a purse on a bench and walking away from it with the intent for someone to take it?  Entrapment?  It would seem that most would say that if he/she was an honest person to begin with, the person would not have gotten in that car or walked away with that purse. 

                Does entrapment infringe on a person’s rights? Morally or otherwise? One expects a certain kind of deception when it comes to law enforcement.  During interrogation and investigations.  It seems to be a matter of course that officers can be deceptive when speaking to suspects and asking them questions as long as the suspect hasn't invoked their rights.  An example of deception during interrogation would be telling a suspect that the co-defendant is currently in the next room giving a statement in great detail of his involvement of the crime they were both involved in.  The reason for this deception of course, would be so the co-defendant would of course start talking himself. 

              Entrapment is a limitation placed on law enforcement, and the courts use a subjective test to make decisions to decide on whether or not a person was entrapped.  This means that the court is actually looking at the suspect’s thought processes when making a decision, and not at the officer’s behavior (Banks, 2013). The issue of entrapment is when law enforcement forces the hand of someone to do something illegal who would normally not commit a crime.  Taking the bait car from above as an example, the the court would look at the person's thought process when he/she got into the car and started it up, and attempts to drive away. Most people don't walk by looking into cars, at least not consciously.  However, the judge isn't looking at most people the judge is looking at the alleged perpetrator at the time of the incident.  Now let's look at the purse on the bench, and this is a completely different scenario.  A person could in theory, grab the purse with the intent of running after the person who left the purse to return it.  Also, most purse's include a wallet inside which normally includes an identification of some sort that would allow the return of the purse.  Different scenarios could result in completely different outcomes when it comes to defenses to entrapment.

               I have attached an article about a man who was acquitted using an entrapment defense.  The case that follows it controversial.  Normally in these types of cases defendants are convicted, but in this case he was acquitted. I think that one must take special note of the jury question during deliberations.  The jury asked a question about the solicitation.  It speaks volumes as to how the jury made the decision in this case.

 http://www.news-journalonline.com/article/20140112/NEWS/140119803?Title=Deltona-sex-sting-raises-entrapment-issue#gsc.tab=0

References

Banks, C. (2013). Criminal Justice Ethics (3d ed.). Thousand Oaks, Ca, USA: SAGE Publications.