Juvenile Justice Essay Example

Teenagers accused of violent crimes should be charged as adults, however, there are exceptions to this. The subject of Juvenile justice is a difficult and complex one with many conflicting scenarios making each case so unique and requiring individualized attention. In 2016 California made the correct and ethical decision in allowing a judge the discretion needed to review each case as pertaining to the facts and circumstances. This gives the judge the ability to charge juveniles as adults for certain violent crimes or not depending on the circumstances and outlying variables. For Juvenile Justice there is not a “one size fits all”.

Criminals must be punished for breaking the law, whether they are a juvenile or not. If someone commits a crime a punishment must be given to uphold the law. There are cases in which the punishment should vary, but in all cases of violent crime, there must be a consequence for such actions. If no punishment is upheld how can it be called “justice”, there is none, the loved ones of the victims will never experience the justice they deserve.  In the case of Jennifer Bishop Jenkins whose, pregnant sister was murdered, by a teen, thankfully justice was served and he was sentenced as an adult to life without parole. Imagine you were in Jennifer's shoes, except teens couldn't be charged as adults. You would have to live with that guilt, knowing your sister's murder will soon be living his life once again, while she and her unborn will never have the chance to live theirs. This would not be justice, a potential serial killer allowed to walk freely after “rehabilitating” to simply commit another crime, no justice whatsoever. From any such actions even done by a teenager, there must be a reaction, and in the case of violent crimes done by teenagers, a consequence is in order. “You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.”

Let’s say juveniles couldn’t be charged as an adult, and after committing even a violent crime, the worst that can happen is going through the juvenile system and being “rehabilitated”. This almost would be creating an incentive to commit more crime as a juvenile, knowing you will only be tired as a juvenile, knowing you can get away with those things. However, by enabling adolescents to be tried as adults it takes that incentive away. In other words, trying juveniles as adults simply is a better option than not because without having the ability to charge them as adults an incentive has been created to commit crimes. Being stronger on crime doesn’t exactly work 100 percent of the time, however, not being soft will reduce the amount of crime committed in general. By giving youth a way out only makes them exploit this loophole even more. A perfect example of this is every high schooler ever, who are always trying to find a way out of responsibility and work. If teens knew they could commit petty or violent crimes and only be charged as a juvenile with rehabilitation as a consequence , they would continue to exploit this until fixed. This must not happen, as a society, crime should not be tolerated, the potential fiend being bred from toleration of crime could easily turn into a terrible monster if not put into check.

Nevertheless, it isn’t fair to say, all, juveniles committing crimes are monsters, people do make mistakes and that’s part of life and some can be made with very rash judgment in mind. Teenagers that commit crimes should be charged as adults, with exceptions because they’re teens that may have had outside forces determining the very brash actions when committing a violent crime. In order to be fair and truly in act justice, enacting punishments while also being considerate of all the facts, judgment systems should all adopt California's policy of allowing judges the liberty of charging juveniles based on individual cases and their own details.

All teens act overly dramatic and without any logic, and this is natural. It isn’t an anomaly for a teenager to behave this way, there is a difference however from shouting at parents, and killing someone. This is a very big difference between the two, but both of them share within teenagers’ brains, the frontal cortex that determines risk vs. reward is being affected. David Dobbs a writer for the National Geographic Magazine wrote an article titled, “Beautiful Brains”, he explains why teenagers behave at that age due to them being in an immature and impulsive state, with their brains going through a complete reorganization. Dobbs states, “our brains undergo a massive reorganization between our 12th and 25th years… as we move through adolescence, the brain undergoes extensive remodeling, resembling a network and wiring upgrade” (13). Of course, teenagers aren’t going to think straight when committing any sort of crime, because their brains most likely can’t process what they are doing anyway. According to Dobbs, teenagers are going through a massive change in their brains, causing them to act completely differently, being in an immature state that doesn’t register the risks. They only seem to recognize the reward, so putting this into content with a teenager committing a violent crime they only see what they can gain from it, not what the outcomes will be.

The worst-case scenario of factors that drive a teen to commit violent crimes in a normal state they would never do, is when mental or physical trauma such as abuse. This is certainly when a judge needs to be able to see all the facts before acting in the name of justice. In Colorado, in 1992 Jacob Ind was charged with the first-degree murder of his mother and step-father. Jacob was soon sent to prison and sentenced to life without parole, but this punishment didn’t fit the crime he had committed because of additional information which caused him to commit this atrocity. Jacob’s brother Charles and later Jacob, once given the chance to appeal in front of the court, both testified that their stepfather Kermode Jordan had, “basically raped us.” This kind of trauma that Jacob had to suffer through in a teenager’s mind wouldn’t go away unless he did something resulting in killing his stepfather. This doesn’t justify what Jacob had done, he committed murder which must be punished. However, punishing him, without taking his past experiences into account, was completely wrong. The same goes for many youth who have faced traumatic experiences in their past, causing them to act in unnatural outbursts. In these cases, we can not send a teen to their figurative deaths in prison by charging them as adults because they were backed into a corner with no way out, except with the death or harm of another.