Lwop_Alternatives

Trevor Jones was by all accounts a good kid. He was raised in a working class family, and had excelled both academically and in sports during high school. He never had been in trouble with the law. But one day, one costly decision, changed his life forever. Trevor had this brilliant idea that he was going to sell a gun to a mutual friend of his for a hundred dollars. Later that week, Trevor and a buddy left with a gun in hand to make the sell. A mutual friend of theirs decided to by the gun from Trevor, so the two boys decided to meet at a parking lot to do the exchange. When Matt gave him the money, Kevin kept both the gun and money telling Matt he better not tell anyone about this. As Trevor and his friend started walking away, he claims the gun discharged on accident striking Matt in the head; he died later that evening in the hospital. Trevor turned himself in the next day to the police. During the trial, Trevor testified that the gun went off accidently. The jury agreed with him and charged him with reckless manslaughter instead of first degree murder. But they also convicted him of robbery, which resulted in a conviction on the charge of a felony murder and a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Trevor's legal team appealed the convictions, arguing their client was being punished for Matt Foley's death twice, once for the manslaughter conviction and again with felony murder. They argued the court should throw out the felony murder conviction because manslaughter more accurately represented the will of the jury. Their appeal was denied and Trevor started serving his sentence in 1997 (Bikel). This is just one of hundreds of cases of a child being sentenced to life in prison without any possibility of parole. Many will argue that Trevor and others juveniles get what they deserve. But do they really' It is clear that this kid and many others juveniles behind bars have committed horrible acts. Should children who have committed acts of murder be locked up without the possibility of parole, or should society take the approach with rehabilitation, these kids have better chances to lead productive lives in today’s world. Many child psychologists and so-called experts in criminal behavior believe the answer is rehabilitation first. In this paper I plan to cover the following topics: ← History behind Tougher Sentences ← Are juveniles more immature than adults ← What’s the difference between life in prison and the death penalty ← Alternative Solutions History behind tougher sentences There was a sense in the United States, for the most part in the mid-1980s, that juvenile crime rates were on the rise, and the criminals were getting younger and more brazen. This is a time when the phrase juvenile super predator entered the public awareness. Juvenile super predators were characterized as ruthless kids, youths with no moral conscience who saw crime as a rite of passage, who are unconcerned about the consequences of their actions, and who are undeterred by the punishment that could be leveled against them by the juvenile court system. Some believed these changes were caused by everything from violence in video games, to alcohol and even drug abuse of their young, unmarried mothers. People were scared. There was a rise in the use of crack cocaine, and juvenile offenders were sometimes involved in crimes related to the crack cocaine and gang activity. The use of firearms had also been on the rise, and there was a sense across the county that we needed to respond to these high juvenile crime rates. Many state legislators adopted the super predator explanation for the increase in juvenile violent crime in the early 1990s and responded appropriately. To insure the justice system had at its disposal the appropriate sanctions to handle this new breed of juvenile offender, nearly every state in the early 1990s changed in significant ways how their justice systems responded to violent juveniles. These changes were all designed to increase the flow of juveniles into the adult criminal justice system and they took many forms. Many states passed legislation that required juveniles charged with certain violent crimes to be tried as adults or expanded the list of crimes that were excluded for juvenile court jurisdiction. Some states even gave prosecutors the rights to file certain juvenile cases in either juvenile or adult court. Some states broadened the range of offenses or lowered the age of a youth a juvenile court judge could transfer to the criminal court. Many states made multiple changes. But even though juvenile crime rates have declined, the changes put into effect by the law still remain with us today. Are Juveniles more immature than adults It is pretty much common knowledge that there is a huge difference in the mentality levels of kids, juveniles and adults. We have a variety of laws in this country that protect our children; and are enforced on a daily basis such as: the National Minimum Drinking Age Act that states you cannot legally drink under the age of 21, a Motion Picture rating system that says children under 17 cannot view rated R films without an adult, laws that protect minors from having sex with people over 18 and we don’t let people vote who are under the age of 18. Yet, we will charge a 13 year old as an adult, try them in adult court, and give them an adult sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. Neuroscientists are now able to produce scientific results that both parents and child psychologists have been saying for years- kids are less developed than adults, hence, they may not be able to fully comprehend their actions. The key developmental difference between the two seems to lie in the frontal lobe. The frontal lobe of teenagers is composed of different quantities and types of cell matter and has different neural features than the adult brain. Researchers have linked the frontal lobe (especially a part of the frontal lobe called the prefrontal cortex) to: regulating aggression, long-range planning, mental flexibility, abstract thinking, the capacity to hold in mind related pieces of information, and perhaps moral judgment. In children, the frontal lobe has not developed sufficiently to perform these functions. While a child goes through puberty, the frontal lobe undergoes substantial transformations that increase the individual’s ability to undertake decision making processes that allows a person to weigh rationally the consequences of a particular course of action. These cell and neural developments in the brain provide an anatomical basis for concluding that youth up to age eighteen are, on average, less responsible for criminal acts than adults. As Daniel Weinberger, director of the Clinical Brain Disorders Laboratory at the National Institutes of Health explains, the developed frontal lobe, including its prefrontal cortex, "allows us to act on the basis of reason. It can preclude an overwhelming tendency for action. . . . It also allows us to consciously control our tendency to have impulsive behavior (Therestof). According to Daniel Weinberger, the director of the Clinical Brain Disorders Laboratory at the National Institute of Health, the prefrontal cortex of children is significantly underdeveloped compared to that of adults (Theretof). Imagine a child who has been either sexually or psychologically abused by their parents over the course of their young life. Now if it is already proven that they develop slower, and then you throw in abuses such as those in the mix, how can we justify just giving up without trying different alternatives. Differences between life in prison without parole and the death penalty Being sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole is- in a sense-being given a death penalty only without the benefits of a death penalty sentence. What does that mean exactly' Because the death penalty is different and mistakes cannot be corrected, a death sentence usually results in years of mandatory appeals that can sometimes have the sentenced by reduced or repealed all together.  Unlike death penalty cases, life without the possibility of parole sentences’ receives no special consideration on appeal, which limits the possibility they will be reduced or reversed. Juveniles convicted of first-degree murder in are given the same maximum sentence used to punish adults for this crime, life without possibility of parole. Life without possibility of parole sentences imposed on juveniles is extremely harsher than those imposed on adults. The punishment of a sentence of life without parole for a juvenile is significantly different than this same sentence imposed on a say an older adult for the same crime. These sentences when imposed on juveniles are longer, and the years juveniles miss are the most influential, during which they would otherwise finish their education, form relationships, start families, gain employment, and through those experiences learn to become adults. Moreover, adult prisons are especially harsh for juveniles. Juveniles held in adult prisons and jails are at a greater risk of harm than their peers in juvenile facilities. Because of their young age and smaller size, juveniles, both boys and girls, are often the prey for sexual predators and beatings by other prisoners. Perhaps this might explain why the suicide rate for juveniles in adult prisons is eight times that of juveniles in detention facilities (Krisberg). In short, a sentence to life without parole is telling that kid that you are beyond help and that it is best you just die in your cell. Alternative Solutions Many doctors and psychologists believe that due to the immaturity and backgrounds of certain juvenile offenders, perhaps rehabilitation is a key instead of a life without parole sentence. The idea of life with out parole for a child goes against the very goal of what the juvenile just system is supposed to represent. When a juvenile gets a sentence of life in prison, they could serve up to 30 years behind bars, and receive different types of rehabilitation ranging from therapy and even drugs to combat mental illnesses. Meanwhile, children who receive life without the possibility of parole are not given any room for rehabilitation. Sentences of life without parole not only mean absolutely no opportunity for release, they also mean minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison. This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform. While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst, and should not be treated as such. But most sentences must come from reform changes by judges and district attorneys. Blended sentencing is a program that many states are currently looking at in order to curve juveniles being sentenced to life in prison without parole. It entails giving juvenile court judges more options when sentencing youth offenders. Among the states that have adopted blended sentencing schemes, five basic models have emerged. Under the first three approaches, the juvenile court has jurisdiction over the case. The "juvenile-exclusive" model provides a judge with the authority to impose either a juvenile sentence or an adult sentence, while the "juvenile-inclusive model" permits a judge to impose both a juvenile sentence and a stayed adult sentence simultaneously. Under the "juvenile-contiguous" model, a judge may deliver a sentence that remains in effect beyond the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. In the final two approaches, the case arises before an adult criminal court. Under the "criminal-exclusive" model, a judge may render either a juvenile sentence or an adult sentence, while the "criminal-inclusive" model permits a judge to impose both a juvenile sentence and an adult sentence. This scheme best holds young offenders accountable for their crimes while providing juveniles - especially those facing the possibility of LWOP - with the opportunity for a second chance upon a showing of reformation (Goodman). Under this system, a juvenile begins his/her sentence in the juvenile facility, where the kid has access to treatment programs designed specifically for juvenile offenders. Before reaching the age of 18, the juvenile court then will determine, with feedback from therapists at the juvenile facility, whether the child should be transitioned back into the community or transferred to the adult system to serve the remainder of his/her sentence. Conclusion With anywhere from 2200 to 2500 juveniles currently serving LWOP sentences in United States prisons, some legislative action needs to take place. I know it’s politically safe to be tough on crime. But what does it say about us as a society when we sit in our churches on Sunday, listen to sermons about how God forgives all, and so should we, yet when Monday comes, we call a sentencing of life in prison with no chance of parole on a child- an act of justice' A little over four and half years ago, the US Supreme Court abolished the death penalty for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crime. This ruling brought the United States into line with the international community. The United States should now recognize that in resorting to life imprisonment without parole for children under the age of 18, it is in effect sentencing them to death by imprisonment. Also, ask yourself this, how can society deem these children to be adults, when the same society says they can't smoke, drink or even vote legally' They can't even watch an R-rated movie in a theater without an adult legally, yet we giving juveniles adult sentences in adult courtrooms. The life without possibility of parole sentence condemns a child to die in prison. It is not an effective punishment because it has no deterrent value and contradicts our modern understanding that children have enormous potential for growth and maturity in passing from a youth to an adult. It further prevents society from reconsidering a child’s sentence ever and denies the wide expert knowledge that children are susceptible to rehabilitation and redemption. Recommendation The sentencing of juveniles to life in prison without the possibility of parole is a controversial issue. On one side, public perception is that they should be locked up for life because they committed a heinous crime or were partners in said crime. The other side believes that although they committed a horrible act, depending on the age of the offender, rehabilitation and eventual release back into society is the appropriate sentence. Children’s lives are not disposable. The possibility of change in juvenile offenders is much greater than in adults. We can not be a nation that sentences children to die in prison without any possibility of rehabilitation. Science has shown that teenagers are not fully matured, either physically or mentally. Although children are able to grasp the concepts of right and wrong at a very young age, the ideas of weighing long-term risks and benefits are lost on kids, making them more vulnerable to peer pressure than adults, more prone to take risks, and less likely to understand the perspective of others or the consequences of their decisions. If kids don’t deserve a second chance for reform, then who does' Works Cited Bikel, Ofra . "When kids get Life: Five stories." PBS. FRONTLINE, 8 May 2007. Web. 1 Mar. 2010.