Should Juveniles Who Commit Murder Be Tried as Adults - Research Paper Example

 Should Juveniles Who Commit Murder Be Tried as Adults? Introduction Juveniles "represent a large proportion of the crime problem: 16 percent of all arrests, 29 percent of all Index crime arrests, and 33 percent of all property crime arrests" (Urban Police - Policing Juveniles). Increasing jjuvenile crimes are one of the most complex issues faced by the criminal justice system in many countries today. The influences of internet technologies and other media contents are giving ample motivation to the juveniles to engage in antisocial activities. Gun violence, sexual offense, cyber crimes etc are some of the major criminal activities done by the juveniles. Lack of parental control, drug and alcohol addiction, influence of medias etc are some of the major reasons for the increasing juvenile crimes cited by the sociologists. Juveniles are involved in serious murder crimes also. Date et al (2008) have mentioned the arrest of two Virginia teens in connection with a shootings along Interstate 64 near Charlottesville, Va., which left two people injured and six vehicles hit by gunfire (Date et al, 2008) Moreover, reports from Sri Lanka have showed that the Liberation tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) have used juveniles immensely for fighting against the Sri Lankan government. In short, juveniles are engaged in all types of criminal activities like the adults. Now the question is should Juveniles who commit murder be tried as adults and this paper tries to find answer to the above question. Arguments in favour of treating juveniles and adults alike in the court The accused Mumbai attack terrorist, Ajmal Amir Kasab, who has been caught alive, has argued that he was not an adult and should be treated as a juvenile in the court. “On April 17, before the trial began, Kasab had pleaded that he was a juvenile, but the court rejected his claim after examining prosecution witnesses and experts and ruled that he was above 20 years”(The times of India). Whether the argument of Kazab is right or wrong; nobody in India knows since he was a Pakistan citizen. But the point is that Kazab was trying to utilize the liberal rules associated with juvenile crimes and punishments. According to the Indian legal system, Kazab has committed a serious crime which may bring death penalty to him. On the other hand, if he could prove that he belongs to the minor group or the juvenile group, some times he can escape from the death penalty. In others words, terrorist groups across the world know that most of the countries treat juvenile crime in a different angle so that they can escape from severe punishments. Thus more and more juveniles are recruited to their gangs for executing their missions. Those who argue in favour of treating juvenile crimes and adult crimes alike believe that standardization of punishment irrespective of the age barrier may reduce the injection of juveniles into criminal activities by the antisocial elements. Moreover, today’s juveniles are more intelligent than the juveniles of yesterday because of the introduction of new technologies like internet into the educational system. In many countries, the drink age and the age for sexual consent are 16. In other words, today’s juveniles are capable of taking matured decisions. Under such circumstances, it is better to treat both juvenile crimes and adult crimes alike according to the supporters of treating juveniles and adults alike in the court Arguments against treating juveniles and adults alike in the court In 1997, 11-year-old Abraham fired a .22-caliber rifle striking and killing 18-year-old Ronnie Green, Jr.The child's defenders attest that Abraham admitted that he fired the gun, but he said he was aiming at trees. They also say that he has the mental capacity of someone years younger, and that the murder was not premeditated (Should CHILDREN Be Tried As, ADULTS?) In the above case, Abraham was handicapped with tow things; immaturity and underdeveloped brain or intelligence. Even though Abraham has committed murder, he should be treated differently according to the supporters who favour treating juveniles and adults alike in the court. They strongly believe that the society was responsible for the murder committed by Abraham. Abraham has not received adequate care or treatment for his mental problems or underdevelopment of brain. Moreover, the society was responsible for allowing Abraham to use the gun without any restriction. If the court, treat the juvenile crime same way like the adult crime, Abraham will get serious punishments which may destroy his future. He will never get a second chance to rectify his mistake and lead a normal life Life is the most precious thing in this world and immense value is associated with each human life. Nobody knows from where we come and where we go. No science or technology has so far succeeded in creating an artificial life in a laboratory set up. Under such circumstances we can safely argue that only the creator has the authority to take decision about the life of human. It is immoral to take the life of a person by a human under any circumstances. According to Rev. Jamal Bryant, National Youth and College Director for the NAACP, “to just throw our young people in jail without any regard for their future says we don't have a regard about our collective future. Juveniles should be punished-`spare the rod, spoil the child' is the biblical principle (Should CHILDREN Be Tried As, ADULTS?) An 8-year old boy has been charged with the premeditated double murder of his father and another man as per the recent reports in media. Reports indicate the father taught his son how to use guns.  Since the family members are avid hunters, the father specifically taught his son how to use a rifle to shoot prairie dogs.  The boy apparently used a .22-caliber rifle in shooting his father and the other man.  While many in the town are reacting to the news with shock and concluding a child that young could not have known what he was doing, police believe abuse may have triggered the boy to plan to kill his father and the other man (O’NEILL) It is impossible to blame the juvenile for the above crime. Society and the family are responsible for the above crime. The father was culprit of giving gun training to an eight year old child. It is impossible to believe that a child of eight years may exhibit maturity in his behavior. An eight year old boy will definitely like toy guns during this period for playing. But giving training on real guns at this period is definitely an idiotic act. Moreover the above incident reportedly happened because of the child abuse by the father. Neither the consequences of the violent crime were not revealed to the child by anybody nor were the child able to think rationally at an age of eight, which triggered the crime. The National Network for Child Care reports that children at this age “…are beginning to see things from another child’s point of view, but they still have trouble understanding the feelings and needs of other people…” and they are just starting to “…learn [how to] to plan ahead and evaluate what they do.”  Finally, the American Psychological Association reports that “…the part of the brain that is responsible for good judgment and the control of impulses—the pre-frontal cortex—is still immature; consequently, children of this age-period …. don’t have yet the capacity to fully control their impulses (O’neill) Treating the murder committed by an eight year old same way like that of an adult is illogical. Giving death penalty or life imprisonment to an eight year old child would be the denial of natural justice to a human being. Adults are aware of the consequences of their criminal offenses because of their superior abilities for rational thinking compared to the juveniles. A crime will become a serious offense only if the accused was done it deliberately. Unintentional crimes normally get fewer punishments. For example, a bus driver who was responsible for a serious accident may get the benefit less punishment because of the unintentional nature of the crime. Sane way, juveniles don’t know the consequences of their criminal activities and hence the punishments for juvenile crimes should be for making them rather than breaking them. Criteria that our judicial system uses to decide if the juveniles get tried as adults Juvenile courts are in place in many countries in order to deal with juvenile crimes. Juvenile courts give more emphasize to correction rather than punishments in their verdicts. Patton (n. d) has mentioned that children between the ages of seven and fourteen were presumed incompetent to form the requisite criminal intent. Moreover, children over age fourteen were presumed to have the capacity to form criminal intent. Adult criminals were morally blameworthy; children were merely the products of their environment and therefore retributive punishment was not warranted (Patton) Conclusions The crime, murder and its consequences would be same irrespective of who commit it; an adult or a juvenile. Even though the meaning of murder is same irrespective of who commit it, punishments for murder crime cannot be standardized. The criminal justice system should consider the nature of the crime, intention of the crime and the maturity of the accused in order to give its verdict. In my opinion, murder crime committed by juveniles should be isolated from that committed by the adults considering the immaturity of the juveniles. Works Cited 1. DATE JACK, THOMAS PIERRE, JAFFE MATTHEW and COOK THERESA. 2008, “Second Teen Arrested in Va. Shooting Spree”. 06 April 2010. 2. O’NEILL, LINDSEY. 2008. “Children Charged With Murder… Should they be Tried as Adults?”. 06 April 2010. 3. Patton, William Wesley. “History of Juvenile Crimes”. 06 April 2010. 4. “Should CHILDREN Be Tried As, ADULTS?”. 1999. 06 April 2010. 5. The Times of India. May 31, 2010. “26/11 Attack: Kasab's Trial Likely to Conclude Today”. 06 April 2010. 6. “Urban Police - Policing Juveniles”. 06 April 2010. Read More