Introduction
Juvenile court system is a parallel criminal system provided for juvenile delinquents. Criminal justice system realized that juvenile offenders have special needs as compared to adult criminals in that they are young, and have great future to pursue; therefore, the main objective of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate them. The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) asserts that, the objective of the juvenile justice system is to “encourage a process of behavioral change by helping the child or young person to feel accountable for his or her actions and understand their impact on others, and foster integration rather than alienation (2010, p. 4). The juvenile justice system follows the same philosophy as in criminal justice system but it is more inclined to rehabilitating than punishing juvenile offenders. This paper explores the case of a boy who murdered a woman when he was 12 years old in Detroit. He has been sent to a juvenile prison where he will be detained till he attains twenty years of age after which the authorities will decide if he should be released or serve life sentence. If he is convicted with felony during the juvenile detention, young Dermarco Harris may end up spending the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Harris’ Case
Harris was taken to a juvenile detention facility. According to the Judge Sheila Gibson, the detention facility will closely monitor his behavior just as is the case with other violent juvenile offenders. After a period of half a year, the judge will review his behavior with reference to the detention facility and determine if she will need to make any adjustments as far as his placement is concerned. It is noteworthy that the boy said that he had been forced to murder the woman.
He has been sent to a juvenile prison where he will be detained till he attains twenty years of age after which the authorities will decide if he should be released or serve life sentence. If he is convicted with felony during the juvenile detention, young Dermarco Harris may end up spending the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Harris does not have any record of other juvenile offenses. Owing to this, it would not be wise to sentence the boy to life imprisonment even if he may not portray signs of complete rehabilitation in the juvenile detention facility. That would be like judging his childhood offenses as though he had the mindset of an adult when he murdered the woman.
The people who were actively involved in the case of the young boy were his own father who turned him in to the police, his mother and John Williams who was the witness of the crime. John Williams was in the car where the victim, Trisha Bablock, was shot dead. In his statement, Harris said that he did not intend to shoot the woman-he only wanted to rob her. He said that the gun went accidentally off when the woman grabbed his hand. The fingerprints that he left on the driver’s side window were used as evidence for the crime. He did not mention his accomplices in the crime. He was charged with felony murder, violation of curfew and armed robbery. He was also charged with felony-firearm.
The alarming increase of Juvenile Offenders
Critics of the juvenile justice system argue that the system has become ineffective in its objective and mission of protecting the rights of the juvenile offenders and rehabilitating them. The critics base their evidence in the rapid increase of juvenile offenders. According to Dickens, “there is a general perception, sometimes correct and sometimes unjustified, that juvenile offending rates are increasing constantly and significantly, and that ever more serious and violent crimes are being committed by ever-younger children” (2007, p. 6). Regrettably, critics attribute the rapid increase of juvenile offenders to the weakness of the juvenile justice system. This perception has greatly backed the critics’ bid that juvenile offenders should receive severe forms of punishment e.eg. life imprisonment to act as a warning to those juveniles who contemplate committing certain crimes.
The exponential rate of juvenile offenders in the contemporary society emanates from social and economic intricacies. According to UNICEF views, “sudden and often extreme economic precariousness the population quickly found itself when drastic measures were introduced to prepare for the market economy, and to the anomie and rejection of authority that often characterized the initial period of post-Communism” (6). The rapid increase of juvenile offenders is due to changes in economic system. Transition from communism into capitalism tremendously increased the number of juvenile offenders because the change in economic system affected labor markets which affected families and by extension social and economic aspects of youth. Therefore, instead of putting the whole blame on juvenile justice system, it is prudent to focus on probable factors that have led to the rapid increase in juvenile delinquencies. The function of the juvenile justice system is to correct juvenile delinquents through appropriate programs and not to prevent occurrence of crimes. The increase in the numbers of juvenile offenders as well as the increase in the severity of the crimes committed by the juvenile offenders in the 21st century require that the justice system to reconsider its stand. This is because if most juvenile offenders are given harsh sentences, the society will be deprived of contribution of such individuals in the development of the economy.
Juvenile Delinquency is a Disorder as the major cause of the offense
Juvenile delinquency is an adolescent disorder that affects children between the ages of about 7 and 17 years. Juveniles at this age normally experience adolescent disorder that affects their rational decision making abilities. The rational ability of a juvenile and an adult are not equal hence juveniles need special consideration in punishment and rehabilitation programs. Scott and Steinberg argue that juveniles who constantly commit crimes, “in contrast to the vast majority of juvenile offenders, their involvement in crime does not only appear to be the product of adolescent immaturity; it has additional roots in the neurological, psychological, familial, and environmental deficits” (2008, p. 225). Based on this argument, juvenile delinquency results from a complex youth disorder that requires rehabilitation rather than punishing them. Contemporary abolitionists want to merge criminal justice system and juvenile justice system without considering the unique needs of the juvenile offenders. It is imperative to realize and consider the unique psychological conditions of juvenile offenders by assigning them separate justice system that will consider their needs; therefore, juvenile justice system needs no abolition.
The mission and vision of the juvenile justice system is to provide a lenient justice environment, and separate juvenile offenders from adult criminals to rehabilitate them effectively. Although Barry Feld agrees with this important goal, he argues that, “the juvenile justice system was doomed to failure even from the beginning; because it was thrown into the role of providing child welfare at the same time it was instrument of law enforcement” (Sigel & Welsh, 2008, p. 522).
The correctional function of the Juvenile system
As aforementioned, the primary role of juvenile detention is to rehabilitate the juvenile offenders and help them change for the better. Juvenile offenders not only receive protection from the influences of adults but they also get protection against unfair trial due to their ages. Juvenile offenders are very delicate and sensitive to the influences of adults, and harsh sentences will impair positive behavior change. Therefore, leniency and welfare objectives of the juvenile justice system creates conducive environment for effective rehabilitation.
The juvenile justice system has benefitted the juvenile offenders and the society for the last 100 years, thus giving harsh sentences to juvenile offenders may not be wise since it has been effective for all those years. “Juvenile courts allowed society to intervene early in the lives of troubled youth and they prevented a variety of horrors that occurred whenever young defendants were thrown in with adult criminals” (Butts, 2010, p. 25). The system has enabled many youths to change their behavior and pursue their dreams making them great people in the society and Harris is no exception.
Conclusion
As discussed above the juvenile detention of the juvenile offender, Harris, should be sufficient to enable him to live a normal life afterwards. According to the court ruling of 17 May 2010, juveniles have the right to parole in case they are charged with serious crimes such as homicide (Barnes, 2010, p.1). This means that the sentences for juvenile offenders must be different from those of adults who commit the crime. One of the major aspects that call for the abolition of life sentence without parole is that children, as opposed to adults, have a rather long time to build reputable characters. Therefore, the fact that a child commits an offense in their early stages of development does not mean that they will remain to be criminals for the rest of their lives thus the need for a chance to interact with the rest of the community.
REFERENCES
Barnes, R. (2010). Supreme Court Restricts Life Without Parole for Juveniles. Retrieved from
Butts, J. (2010). Can we do without Juvenile Justice? American Bar Association,
4(2), 22-45.
Dickens, C. (2007). A perspective on the Juvenile Justice System. The Journal of
Criminal Law and Criminology, 3(1), 4-18.
Scott, E., & Steinberg, L. (2008). Rethinking Juvenile Justice. New York:
Harvard University Press.
Sigel, L., & Welsh, B. (2008). Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice, and Law.
New York: Cengage Learning.
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund, (2010). Juvenile Justice.
The Innocenti Digest, 1-24.
