How Does Race Influence Judicial Decisions - Thesis Example

How does race influence judicial decisions specifically looking at children being tried as adults Introduction: This topic is an important since it concerns itself with the welfare of young people, especially children and juveniles. It is often the case that in the legal jurisprudence of the United States of America, children are often tried in adult Courts of Law, instead of being tried in juvenile Courts, or Centers. This is deplorable since the aspects of juvenile or child delinquency needs to be corrected by rehabilitation and /or treatment, and not through the process of adult punitive measures like jail sentencing and imprisonment. This is important since it is often seen that juvenile or child offenders, who are not able to provide bail money are incarcerated in prisons without the dim hope of freedom or respite. Often they have to work for pittance in jails in order to provide for themselves. It is strongly felt that the best institutions that could try child or juvenile offenders need to be Juvenile Courts, and not adult Courts. This is because of the two principal reasons: 1. The child brain has not developed to an extent to understand the extent and implications of his crime. He/she may not be able to gauge the results of the crime while committing it. 2. At their tender age, what is more important is the ability of the system to take correctional and rehabilitative measures to bring the offender back into the mainstream in order to do productive and useful work in future. By incarcerating the child to jail sentences, their future lives are spoiled and even after their sentences are completed, it may be too late to being them back into the mainstream of social life, and thus, later, they would prove burdens for themselves and society and may indulge in large-scale criminal activities due to non-correctional measures. Children and juveniles are not in a position to offer strong defense in adult courts of law because of their cognitive disabilities and other limitations because of which their position would be marginalized in adult Courts and they would not be in a position to defend themselves as well as they could possibly be able to do in Juvenile Courts, which would need to take more compassionate perspective of their crimes and misdemeours and pass judgments, based on individual characteristics of the crime and perceived 'child criminal. Judgments need to be based on rehabilitative and correctional therapy and not designed to be punitive based. The aspect of children being tried in adult Courts is a social problem and sociologists, child behavioral specialists and child psychologists need to feel the responsibility of ensuring that the incidence of such cases are kept to the minimum. However, when one has to judge the severity of the crime, especially murder or rape, there needs to be a greater degree of autonomy to be granted to the legal process in trying such serious offenses and meting out punishment to the offenders, whether under-age or adult. This research study would take up the matter of trying children and its short and long-term implications upon society. The research question is: Should children or Juveniles be tried in adult courts Literature Review: In order to understand the progression of this hypothesis, it is necessary to go back to history. The aspects of juvenile Courts are a recent phenomenon. During the 18th Century, an offender who was above 7 years of age would be treated as adults. It was believed during that time that children below 7 years lacked moral capacity, and was thus devoid of giving consent. It has been documented that, before the 20th Century, 10 children below 14 years of age were awarded capital punishment in US for committing heinous crimes. (Stolba, 2001). The combination of child offenders with adult criminals in prison settings created social unrest, so much so that the "Society for the prevention of juvenile delinquents " was formed in 1925. With the primary objective of rehabilitating juvenile offenders. Since the majority of inmates were children, being more susceptible to reform process in order to' rehabilitate and educate youthful delinquents' rather than punitive actions. However, over the years, it was seen that these juvenile centers "evolved from small houses of repute into larger reformations that resembled adult prisons." (Stolba, 2001). Now the question arouse as to who could fund and manage large juvenile homes. It became necessary to seek Government assistance and thus, in 1899, the first State Juvenile Court was established in Chicago city. It was during year 1925 that a large number of confederations accepted and implemented the juvenile court systems but towards the middle of the 20th century, serious allegations were leveled against these courts, terming them to be sympathetic towards offenders, and, more seriously, it had failed to provide fundamental human rights to juvenile offenders. Moreover, the occurrences of cases like the Kent v. US (1966) 383 US 541, Breed v. Jones, Winsship case, etc also brought into sharp focus the question of denying rights to the juvenile to the process of law and being held in jail pending trial. In the case of Schall v. Martin, the courts held that juveniles cannot be held in jail pending trial proceedings. "The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that, since the vast majority of juveniles detained under the statute either have their cases dismissed before an adjudication of delinquency or are released after adjudication, the statute is administered, not for preventive purposes, but to impose punishment for unadjudicated criminal acts, and that therefore the statute is unconstitutional as to all juveniles. (Martin, 1984). Towards the latter part of the 20th Century, the incidence of rising juvenile crimes began to question the effectiveness of the brand of justice meted out by Juvenile Courts. It seemed to make a mockery of the entire judicial system and to optimize benefit of age to commit crimes with apparent impunity. Thus, the Government felt it necessary to act fast and promulgate amendments in order to strengthen legislation to curb juvenile crimes and also necessitate the need to transfer youth crimes to adult courts, in order to offer stiffer punishments and also remove the cloak of 'confidentiality' associated with juvenile crimes. The Bureau of Justice Statistics data on juvenile offenders reveal that of the approximately 7,000 juveniles serving time in adult prisons, more than half of them are doing so for violent crimes 76 percent of them are seventeen or eighteen years old." (Stolba, 2001, P.1). The Sociological theories of this problem where the race and age of the youngsters and juveniles are subjected to police interrogations reserved for adult suspects. The concept of parens patriae , literally meaning 'father of his country' means that the government assumes the ultimate guardianship of the disable person, or child, till attaining 18 years of age, and its care has only been 'entrusted' to its parents on behalf of its parents, or in the absence of its parents. In such circumstances, the Court is retained to exercise jurisdiction over the child and transfer custody, child support etc, without prejudice to earlier judicial pronouncements or rulings. (Law.com Dictionary, 2008). Thus it is seen that the current literature review on this interesting subject deals mainly from the point of view of the victim, or the child, or the juvenile delinquent who has been committing crimes against the State with impunity and without fear of its consequences. When the defense counsel argues in terms of fundamental rights, he does not mention the violation of fundamental rights that his client has indulged in. When there are issues raised about legal protection or privileges enjoyed by underage citizens, he does not mention about the same or even higher levels of security and protection that were transgressed by his client. Access to the process of law has been the constant claim for under trial suspects but it did not occur to them that the process of law is equally applicable to the prosecution and the victim and its relatives. Fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution and protected bylaw applies with equal force to the defense parties as well as to the aggrieved applicant. In this case, it is necessary to seek the redressals available for the applicants who have been the victim of the juveniles' misbehavior and misdeeds. It is this area, which needs to be looked into more deeply and conscientiously, in terms of the perspectives of the injured or aggrieved parties. This includes aspects of the law enforcement agencies, including Courts of Law, who may be impeded in the administration of duties, by presence of legal impediments and judicial restrictions on taking corrective steps to remedy and rectify the situation, as it deems fit and necessary. This needs to be assessed under the given set of circumstances, and according to the conduct of the relevant parties and processes to the proceedings. Methodology: The research question/hypothesis is: Should children or Juveniles be tried in adult courts In a research study of this sort, it is necessary to ascertain the facts through literature review, which bears relevance to this aspect of legal jurisprudence. It is also necessary to reach a final decision after considering all aspects of the study, including the views of parents, guardians and teachers of juveniles, law enforcement agencies, forensic doctors, criminologists, child behavioral experts, psychiatrists and psychologists and others who are closely connected with the subject under research. This subject could best be addressed to parents and guardians who know more about their wards than others could know. It also needs to taken circumstantial evidence into account while dealing with the topic since children are known to act violently or unreasonably under stress situations, often against their better judgment. For carrying out empirical studies on a topic of such importance to the lives and future career of juveniles and young children, it is therefore, necessary that the incorporation of the research program be done carefully and effectively. Thus, after giving due consideration to all aspects of the research question, through a clear planning process and procedure, not only to gain the optimum level of any interventionist or preventive strategy, but also to actively control and monitor it for impact and results. For a research, experiment of this nature, the evaluative study and determination of the correct objective of research is as important as the procedure and methodology by which it is framed and implemented. There are two aspects to this research question in terms of authorities who would support the motion and those who would be against it. The authorities who would support the hypothesis that children need to be tried in adult courts would be first and foremost, law enforcement agencies, legal professionals and criminologists. They have expert professional knowledge and thus would form the nucleas of this study. It is proposed to interview them for the purpose of this study. Again, parents, teachers and local relatives of the children would be most likely to discourage use of adults courts for children since there are disparities in the mental personalities of children and adults. The sentencing of children in cells with condemned adults is not a particularly relishing proposition for them. Another set of samples need to be done from the wardens of Juvenile delinquents and rehabilitation centers regarding the profiles of juvenile inmates, etc. Therefore, it is also necessary to include the above population in the methodology The type of method that would be used is through face-to-face interviews with the above-mentioned respondents for gaining first hand knowledge and information about the research question and its ramification, especially in terms of sentencing and jail imprisonments. The purpose of this methodology is to ask open-ended questions to the respondents in order to obtain first hand accounts of the issue and how it could be interpreted in real terms. The main question however, would be to examine the issues connected with treating child criminals at par with adult offenders and the adverse effects it could bear on their psyches and later personalities. Since the study does not have an answer, it is exploratory in nature and basically a qualitative exercise; the research question does not delve into quantum but only wishes to state in real terms whether adult sentences are suitable for young offenders. There are two types of major crimes, one conducted under the stress of the moment, or under extreme provocation, and there is yet another type of major crimes that are pre-mediated planned and perfectly executed. The difference between pre-mediated and impulsive crimes lie in the diabolical nature of its planning and the degree of precision in its execution. There are several deductions to be made in this kind of deductive approach, since it would be in terms of deducing conclusion from a set of given data. The variables, measurements and concepts forming part of this study are discussed below: Variables: Since it is a qualitative study, based on the inputs derived from the study of sample population, it would at best be representative of the sample studied. The samples taken up from a cross -section of respondents who are relevant for this study and whose analysis would bedrock the basis and structure of this research analysis. Individual preferences and bias would have to be considered as variables, including choice of one mode of corrective therapy over another. Measurement: The qualitative data would have to be subjected to further statistical analysis for more accurate results. There is a combination of discrete qualitative data, which needs to be analyzed using advanced research techniques. The margin of error also needs to be imputed and the results drawn accordingly. Concepts: Certain assumptions have been made to facilitate data collection, collation and assimilation. These are in terms of the fact that male and females responses have not been segregated, although both genders have been covered in the study. Further, the ages, occupations, sexual preferences and income status of the respondents have not been considered as integral part of the study group. Since the focus has been in terms of child/juvenile crime and punishment, this has been the main area of study in terms of data assimilation. Face-to-face interviews: This method of personal interview for the subject under study is the best available under the circumstances. Questioners would be lengthy and would not be realistically forthcoming since the topic is not one of common interest, but has specialized connotations. Moreover, it is necessary that active interaction be necessary to reach the right conclusions, which only personal interviews could provide. It is necessary that in a study of this kind, where highly specialized knowledge is necessary, the personal interview method would be the best available that could negate the possibilities of bias, errors and misstatements and present authentic, truthful and responsive results for the study. Further, the interviews would ensure that the responses are delivered from authentic sources and could be relied upon for providing platform for further analysis and interpretation at a later stage. The validity of findings could be further increased by combining this with internet questionnaires designed for a select band of professionals in health care delivery systems The data could be collected from respondents through the process of personal interviews The data could be administered by use of professional marketing teams in the area where this needs to be done. The interviews would be considered by making prior appointments with respondents at time suitable for them. These series of interviews are important since they form the premise for the research study and all further studies on this topic would be derived from them. The role of the writer would be that of a moderator in Focus group. The main thrust area would be in terms of co-coordinating and evaluating position and progress of the study group. Ethical considerations: Since the respondents are underage (average 14 years) and below, it has been deemed necessary to seek parents' opinions as the main area of focus. . It is also necessary to protect the findings of the interviews and responses to the Questions made to the respondents. Since some of the queries are of personal nature, it is necessary to ensure confidentiality in its usage, since its contents could be used to malign their images, at a later stage of their lives. Further, considering the fact that the respondents are underage, due consideration is also being attached to the correct evaluation, treatment and rehabilitation of criminal charges in order that youngsters would grow up to become useful citizens and would discharge their responsibilities with sincerity and diligence. Results and interpretations: It has been rightly adjudged that the causes of criminal activities among children and youth are due to a host of reasons, lack of parental attention and love, broken homes, transition from childhood to adulthood, personal stress, parental and peer academic demands, and a number of psychological, physiological and environment- generated factors. This malaise could not be attributed to any one dependent variable, since a variety of factors; extraneous and internal contribute to criminal activities. Besides, the age of adolescence is an age transition to adulthood. Therefore, the need for proclaiming newborn adult freedom and social independence asserts itself in many ways and criminal activities could just be one manifestation of these difficult transitions. Further, the need for acceptance by peer groups and circles that expect young people to perform may be another cause for criminal activities by students besides the need to reduce academic stress and pressures from parents for attaining or enhancing academic achievements. Decided case: Kent v. U.S. (1966) Several other factors affect upon the need whether young people should be treated as adults in criminal areas. One aspect would be in terms of the gravity of the crime. US Courts have aligned crimes such as murder, manslaughter and rapes by young people to be at par with that committed by adults, and as such, the trial and punishments would be the same as if committed by adults. However, it is often the case that the crimes committed by young people may not be pre-mediated and could have been due to self-defense against attackers. The law needs to take a balanced view of such aspects before passing sentences. In the famous case of Kent v. US (1966) 383 US 541, the defendant was 16 when he was found guilty remanded for housebreak, burglary and finally rape of the female inmate. The Courts found him guilty on the first two counts- housebreak and burglary, but ruled him not guilty of rape since the Courts ruled that he was of unsound mind when he committed the rape. Finally, the legal status of Kent in this case stood as follows: 'Since petitioner is now 21, and beyond the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court, the order of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the District Court are vacated, and the case is remanded to the District Court for a hearing de novo, consistent with this opinion, on whether waiver was appropriate when ordered by the Juvenile Court. "If that court finds that waiver was inappropriate, petitioner's conviction must be vacated. If, however it finds that the waiver order was proper when originally made, the District Court may proceed, after consideration of such motions as counsel may make and such further proceedings, if any, as may be warranted, to enter an appropriate judgment." (US Supreme Court: Kent v. United States, 383, U.S. 541 (1966)). It therefore needs to be seen that the aspects of guilt or innocents has to be seen in the context of evidential status and circumstances surrounding the case. In the case of juveniles, it needs to be seen whether the following could be established: The crime was motivated, well intentioned and pre-mediated and the defendant was aware of the implications and consequences of his misdemeanors, if it does not amount to a serious crime. The child or juvenile had acted in self defense and could provide substantive evidence of it He had acted under coercion or undue influence It was necessary to take such steps in the greater interests. Conclusions: After all the deliberations, it is seen that the hypothesis has been negative and the majority of the respondents felt that children should not be given adult rulings Thus, it could be seen that each case needs to be seen in its individualistic light and no stereotyping or assumptions are made. In the case of young people (14 and below) it is seen that juvenile courts would be a better option and this has been reinforced during the course of this study. This is because the primary objective of remanding young people is not to prescribe punitive actions but to seek correctional and reformists methods to inculcate right societal values and attitudes in them so that they could provide social usefulness during the course of their lives. It has been empirically noticed that punitive actins succeeds only in evolving bitterness and vendetta in minds and does not serve any better purpose. Besides the doctrine of parens patriae invokes that the best interests of the children need to be kept in mind by the administration since, for the time being, they are the guardians of the children. It is necessary that judicial pronouncements meted to youngsters should consider their long-term rehabilitation into society as useful citizens. They need to seek reformist and correctional changes, rather than inflame criminal desires, which could in the end, be self-defeating not only for the individual offenders, but also for the public administration and the larger societal context to which they belong. A differentiation between children and adults needs to be made, not only because of the age factors that polarize the two, but also in the larger interests of socio-economic and environmental factors that underpin their respective value systems and contribution to social order. It had been reiterated that young people are more susceptive to positive changes as compared to hardboiled adult criminals and to compartmentalize them together would be, so to speak, a larger criminal activity than what they stand accused of. It is the responsibility of societal norms to ensure, that children and juveniles should not receive sentences in juvenile courts, which, if applied in real term to adult jail sentences, would be far more reprehensible and disheartening than virtual adult judicial pronouncements. The onus needs to be on correctional strategy and not punitive justice. References Stolba, Christine. (2001). Old Enough to Kill: Should teen killers be tried as adults Christine Stolba looks to history for some answers. Women's Quarterly. BNET. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0IUK/is_2001_Autumn/ai_80951843 Martin, Schall V. (1984). Supreme Court Collections: Supreme Court of the US 467 US 253. Cornell University Law School. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0467_0253_ZS.html Stolba, Christine. (2001). Old Enough to Kill: Should teen killers be tried as adults Christine Stolba looks to history for some answers. Women's Quarterly. BNET. P. 1. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0IUK/is_2001_Autumn/ai_80951843/pg_3 Law.com Dictionary: Parens patriae. (2008). Fine Communications. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://dictionary.law.com/default2.Aspselected=1444&bold=%7C%7C%7C%7C US Supreme Court: Kent v. United States, 383, U.S. 541 (1966). Justia: Beta: US Supreme Court Center. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://supreme.justia.com/us/383/541/ Read More