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.