Juvenile Peer Jury

El Dorado County High School students have an opportunity to participate in the juvenile justice system through the Teen Court program.

After the training, teenagers will serve as the court personnel in real cases in which an offense has been committed by a minor, the minor has admitted to the offense and has chosen to be judged by his or her peers, according to a news release.



http://pubsys.sacbee.com/101/story/1216399.html

The Sixth Amendment suggests that the Defendant have the right to be tried by a jury of his or her peers. Juvenile’s rights differ from adults rights, and this is one example of the way it does. I think it is important to have the right to be tried by a jury of one’s peers, but I disagree that this technique can be effective and successful in juvenile court. Going back to the subject of maturity, I do not think that other juveniles can or should be able to decide the fate of another juvenile. Young adults do know the difference between right and wrong, but I do not think young adults hold the capacity to understand the gravity of this subject to treat it seriously and understand the positive psychological change it could weigh on the defendant with the right punishment.

I think that I would be very helpful for this jury by peers in the effect that these peers can assist the court room members look at the situation from a young adults point of view. Maybe even get an understand of the stressors they go through and what things push them to engage in criminal activities. Whether or not these peers will help the defendant or not, the courtroom can still understand a juveniles psychological thinking patterns by talking to the defendant’s peers.

Juvenile or Adult Court?

Through a fitness hearing, judges decide whether a juvenile is “fit” in order to be tried within the juvenile justice system, according to the alleged crime the juvenile committed. Even though some offenses committed by juveniles would be more proportionate to give the juvenile an adult sentence, other factors weigh in to make the decision to do so or not.

First, it would be wise to try a juvenile in juvenile court if the judge and other courtroom workers feel that the child can be rehabilitated after receiving time in a facility, and participate in rehabilitative programs.

Secondly, the child’s age can counter in questioning factors such as the maturity, experience, decision making, and critical thinking processes some juveniles are slow to process ideals of delinquent behavior and what consequences will come from their actions. In adult court, juveniles are not going to be tried among their peers, so right there alone shows some unjust, but minors do not hold the same mental capacity as adults do so it wouldn’t be fair anyways.

There was a case of a seventeen year old boy by the name of Marquese who officials labeled as a career criminal. Holding a few juvenile felonies under his title, all having to do with theft, Marquese has been through numerous rehabilitation programs and show no signs of improvement in his criminal behavior. Officials hypothesize that Marquese re-offends because he does not have adequate support and supervision after being released from the juvenile facilities since his mother is unable to support him with her drug abusing problem. Marquese is given one more chance to prove himself before he re-offends and definitely goes straight to adult courts for adult penalties.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/four/marquese.html

I think juvenile offenders should be forewarned that their case maybe tried in an adult court, if harsher punishment is necessary. If an offender has been given numerous chances to prove him or her self and been offered different rehabilitation programs and still no positive change has come from it, the juvenile should then receive harsher punishments in order for there to be hope on the offender’s recidivism rate as an adult.