Introduction
This essay compares the criminal justice system as applied to juveniles compared with the process for adult offenders. The following paragraphs provide an overview of the juvenile justice courts system and how it compares with the system used in adult courts, and the determination of the process through which a juvenile offender may be transferred out of the juvenile system and into the adult system. There is also discussion of the increasing trends for: a) the use of waivers and b) remanding juveniles to the adult courts for processing and the societal implications of abolishing juvenile courts.
Juvenile and Adult Justice Systems Compared
LaMance (2012) noted that the overall aim of the juvenile and adult court systems is a key difference between the two. In the case of the juvenile justice system, the principle objective is one of rehabilitation and reform, facilitating the return of the young offender to a normal role in society. For that reason, stated LaMance, alternative sentencing such as probation or parole or other programs designed to keep the young offenders out of prison. As LaMance pointed out, the details of the juvenile justice system vary between states, but the following generally apply:
- Juveniles are generally prosecuted for “delinquent acts” rather than for crimes. However, if those acts are serious in nature, they may be treated as crimes and the young offender then tried in an adult court.
- Juveniles have no right to a jury trial, even if their offence is considered a crime. In that event, the trial aspect is dealt with by a judge, who can rule on whether the juvenile is “delinquent”. That process is termed “an adjudication hearing.”
- If the juvenile is found delinquent, the court decides the action to take, usually to find the best rehabilitation method, in the best interests of the juvenile concerned.
- The juvenile courts are usually less formal than adult courts. As an example, admissibility of evidence rules are often less stringently observed.
However, as LaMance also noted, there are many similarities between juvenile and adult systems, particularly sharing the following rights:
- Confrontation / Cross-examination of witnesses; avoiding incriminating oneself;
- Need for the prosecution to submit proof “beyond reasonable doubt” before an offender can be liable to conviction.
Juvenile and Adult Courts: Point-by-Point Comparison
Although individual states each have their own juvenile justice systems, the following comparisons, adapted from “Juvenile Justice: A Century of Change” (1999), are generally valid:
Transfers to Adult Courts and the Waivers System
According to Redding (2010), a number of states passed legislation in the 1980’s to toughen up on juvenile crime. Measures included reforming the transfer or waiver process, making it more likely that young offenders charged with more serious offenses could be transferred to adult court for trial and sentencing. That inevitably resulted in more young offenders ending up in adult prisons.
According to Redding’s article there are three types of the transfer process:
- “Automatic”: Based on the seriousness of the offense and the juvenile’s age;
- “Judicial”: Decision based on the view of the judge in juvenile court;
- “Prosecutorial-discretionary”: Decision made by the prosecutor concerned.
Unfortunately, Redding reported studies suggesting that juveniles transferred and sentenced to adult prisons were more likely to subsequently re-offend than those dealt with in the juvenile courts system. If juvenile courts were to be abolished, that trend would be exacerbated, resulting in more “career” criminals in our society and more overcrowding in the prisons system.
Conclusions
The rehabilitative approach to juvenile justice seems to have considerable merit in helping to turn youngsters back onto “straight and narrow” before they become career criminals. Those incarcerated in the adult prison system (including juveniles transferred from the juvenile courts) are more likely to turn to a life of crime, which of course is bad for society as a whole and for them as individuals. The increasing trend of the use of waivers and transfers is therefore to be deplored, as would be any suggestion to abolish juvenile courts altogether.
.References
“Juvenile Justice: A Century of Change.” (1999). Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington DC. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/stats/juvvsadult.html
LaMance, K. “How Does the Juvenile Criminal System Differ from the Adult Criminal System?” (2012). LegalMatch Law Library. Retrieved from http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/juvenile-vs-adult-criminal-system.html
Redding, R., E. “Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency?” (June 2010). Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp
