Juvenile Justice System?
962412
sounds like a homework question..  the biggest difference in the systems is terminology.. instead of a juvenile being called a criminal they are called delinquent, they attend hearings... so on. another big difference is the fact that most juvenile hearings aren't open to the public, unlike adult criminal trials. the records of the juveniles are usually confidential, and all can be sealed. The juvenile justice system is based off of the idea that juveniles can be rehabilitated. Most programs, and any possible incarceration, are majorly composed of rehabilitation efforts, and this is all an attempt to make the juvenile a productive member of society.
1091504
Not nearly enough will happen to him, sadly. I'm sorry for what happened to you, but 4th degree will land him in a juvenile detention facility, hopefully till he's 18, then after that? He'll probably walk, with a clean record. It's up to you to follow the case, and speak at his probation hearing. Good luck.
918684
Well, put quite simply, Juveniles should not be tried as adults in court.  But the system is grossly misjudging both adults and children in their capacities to make decisions.\n\nPhysiologically speaking, humans do not fully develop their critical thinking skills until they are adults!  According to developmental psychologists, males' brains do not finish in their development of critical thinking until the age of approximately 21-23.  Women's brains mature a bit earlier, between the ages of 18-21.  \n\nSo this would explain a lot!  Why don't teenagers and young adults seem to make good choices?  Why do many young adults take risks without considering the consequences of their actions?  Because they are physiologically unable!  They have not yet finished developing the mental processes which allow them to do so.  Until the medical community brings forth research to the contrary you will be hard pressed to find juveniles consistently tried as adults...simply for the reason that they are *not* adults! \n\nHave a great day!
560395
Juvenile delinquency refers to antisocial or criminal acts performed by juveniles. It is an important social issue because juveniles are capable of committing serious crimes, but most legal systems prescribe specific procedures and punishments for dealing with such crimes.
436863
First of all they are children and not adults. Juveniles think different than adults. Usually they are not fully aware of the consequences of their actions. By no means does that excuse their behavior, and of course their should be punishment. But the punishment should fit the crime.  Violent offenses should be treated different than non-violent offense. Juveniles respond differently to corrections than adults. I am not sure what type of offense you are talking about.  Because the depends greatly on the way they should be treated in the criminal justice system.  There are so many varying factors in crime. Especially crime committed by minors. What one must really think about is the punishment going to make a smarter criminal? Everyone knows that prison doesn't fix crime. It usually makes better criminals.
229860
right here:\nquick: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_justice\ndetailed :http://www.ncjrs.gov/\n\np.s. trying to get ONLY correct information out of\nY! answers is like trying to get p out of a swimmin' pool.\ni.e. it aint gonna happen (lol)
828297
Absolutely.  \n\nThe criminal justice system has become a rehabilitation focused body instead of of a punishment body
673077
i think each state should be mandated to try teenages as an adult, with no parole, no bail and a daily schedule made up for them in the institute that are assigned to. make it more military than just a sentence until they get out. they do not what is requested of them like the military they are punished again and again until they learn. it only takes 1 kid to kill someone and devastate a family.
313774
I tend to reckon that there are quite a number of us concerned with our laws and there implementations here in Texas and elsewhere.\nBelow you may find comfort in a 'mock report' that I presented for a particualr case in Criminal Justice class.  Jose\n\nReady? Wanna see it? Well, here goes.\n\nGarza 1\nExam III\n\nA review of a police officer’s summary report; “The Case of Samuel Young (13) and Maria Kincaid (10), Chapel Hill, Texas”: Texas v Samuel Young/Statutory Rape/Indecency with a Child; George Young and Theresa Young: Child Abuse/Child Neglect and Contributing to the Corruption of a Minor, respectively; examIIIstoughcriminallaw, Garza, Jose M.; Student/Observer/Analyst 2004\n\nA SUMMARY REPORT TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY\nWhile responding to a service call (Disturbance) at the Twin Oaks Subdivision in North Chapel Hill, Texas, Officer Ima Shortee (responding officer), within the proximity of said disturbance and other unreported activity did then and there witness the sexual misconduct of two minors, and proceeded to arrest the13-year-old child; mainly Samuel Young on the charge of Statutory Rape and Indecency With a Child, after having seen and heard the 13 year old child display his genitalia to 10 year-old Maria Kincaid, and by aggravating the conduct by “threat of tone” so that 10 year-old Maria was coerced into raising her skirt, lowering her undergarments and thereby laying bare her own genitalia.\n\nPurpose:\nTo support, reject or clarify the charges applied to or by the actors according to the Texas Criminal Law and Rules for Criminal Procedure.\n\n\nParticipants:\nTelephone Caller-----------Disturbance Reporter\nOfficer Ima Shortee--------Responding/Arresting Officer\nMaria Kincaid (10)---------Victim\nSamuel Young (13)---------Arrestee\nGeorge Young (33)---------Father of Samuel Young\nTheresa Young (21)--------Mother of Samuel Young\n\nRules in support of argument of minors:\nThe evidence of extraneous offenses or acts under article 38 and 37,of the Texas Penal Code offers no defense against the prosecution that includes Sexual Offenses, Assaultive Offenses, Prohibited Sexual Conduct and the Sexual Performance by a Child.  And therefore Samuel Young 13 is prosecutable for his Sexual Misconduct (Sexual Assault and Indecency with a Child). The rules for Criminal Procedure for the State of Texas are satisfied by a lawful and legally applicapable process applied by the arresting officer, Ima Shortee of the North Chapel Hill police Department. In support of this observation it is essential to abide by Constitutional Due Process Law .  According to the report entry into the residence was not necessary since the perpetrator and the victim were in all probability outdoors (the officer saw and heard) and therefore leaving/baring this event applicable under the Plain View Doctrine , under the Texas Criminal Rules of Procedure.\n\n\nRules in support for argument against parents:\nAccording to the “Family Code-Subtitle B-Chapter 41-Liability of Parents for Conduct of Child”  the parents of minor child Samuel Young (13); Mainly George Young (33) and Theresa Young (21) are criminally liable and prosecutable for the sexual conduct of their child.\n\nOpinion:\nIt is the opinion of this author that both parents are in non-compliance with the Texas Family Code and are therefore liable and prosecutable for the charges of Child Neglect, Child Abuse and Gross Negligence under section § 41.001.  LIABILITY (Parental) and that Samuel Young is in non-compliance with the rules of Sexual Conduct of the State of Texas; Article 38.37;Evidence of extraneous offenses or acts, Section 1.\nOfficer Ima Shortee and the arrest of a child without warrant stands, for the Actus Rhea was in the plain view of the responding officer to the disturbance call and Due Process was not violated neither under the 4th Amendment nor the 14th Amendment and is further valid lawful and legal action by the following Article 14.05 [216] [263] [
337428
Hi\n\nIve worked in the Juvenile Justice System and depending on where you work, the hours are long, and it can be a stressfull and Thankless job, you will have to be stearn and consistent, and not let the youth get advantages over you, The pay is decent but that doesnt help if your overworked, and stressed out, I would take some Criminal Justice Classes and if you care about kids that much, you might serve better as a Counselor or Youth Psychologist,
1127889
What you describe is sad, and the system we have devised.  The courts are the best that human beings have come up with so far in the history of the planet.  But they are far from perfect and mistakes happen all the time.  As you rightly point out, public "pretenders" are anything but helpful.\n\nWhat is important is to not quit, ever.  Even while imprisoned, a person can use his or her wits, and study the law and work actively on the appeal.  Deadlines are critical.\n\nBad things happen to good people.  And life is anything but fair.  Instead of focusing on what happened, sometimes all a person can do is look to the future and make the best of every day.
152985
judicial system \nlegislative system \nand executive system
1021177
Trial by a jury of your peers is still the best justice system in the world, and we should definitely keep it.  Any system of laws is really just a tool.  It's a means to an end, and that end is Justice.  Now I think everyone would agree that Justice is an Ideal... it's a perfect concept, in theory.  But being humans, we are incapible of creating anything perfectly.  Therefore, the tool we have created as the means to reach that perfect ideal of Justice will, by necessity, be flawed.  So, our legal system will never be perfect, and consequently injustices will always come out of it from time to time.  But over the many years since it's inception, we continue to fine tune our legal system, with new legislation, with the appealate court process, with new amendements to the constitution, etc.  The law is constantly changing because, like technology, morality, and every other aspect of human culture, the law is a work in progress.  It will never be perfect, because we are never perfect.  But the trial system the best system humanity has ever devised to pursue the ideal of Justice.\n\n     But the trial by jury is the last line of defense between the people of our great nation remaining free, and the people of our once-great nation falling into a facist state.  It's that right to a trial by a jury of our peers that protects us from unjust laws, from the power which we vote to hand over to our elected public servants corrupting them and allowing them to turn us into the servants, instead.  The jury of your peers is what stands between the people and tyranny.\n\n    People in this country (unlike many others) are still innocent until PROVEN guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.  That "reasonable doubt" standard is very high.  We aren't innocent until it appears we're "probably" guilty, or even "more likely than not guilty."  That jury has to be pretty damn sure we're guilty, and they have to agree on it.  Sometimes in criminal trials someone's very life is on the line.  If it's your life, you have the right to cross-examine witness brought against you.  You have the right to question evidence brought against you.  You have the right to bring witnesses on your behalf, and to bring evidence of your innocence.  In other words, you have the right to plead your case and to try to convince that jury that you didn't do it.  \n\n     Never, ever, let anyone make you believe for a second that this great Republic of ours could pursue our ideal of Justice without the trial system.
682447
The case of the Scottsboro boys is an excellent study of justice in the 1930s. Here is a good site on it:\n\nhttp://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/scottsboro/scottsb.htm
541683
There are many aspects to your question and it could generate many pages of debate on here.\n\nIn my opinion it depends on the situation, and every case would have to be evaluated individually.  Science has proven that the brain continues to grow and change until about the age of 21, so a teenager's brain has not yet fully developed to understand the implications of any crime in an adultlike manner.   The teenager's brain is not fully mature.\n\nA question that has to be considered is the teenager's background.  Many (not all) young people who commit serious crimes had a horrendous time as a child, and were often victims themselves of abuse, often of many types of abuse, often abuse that society turned a blind eye to.   Such kids are emotionally damaged, and need intensive help to recover and be rehabilitated, if that is possible, and it certainly cannot happen if they are sent to adult prison.  They need in depth assessment to determine the extent of their pathology, if any, and the chance of recovery.\n\nAs a society we sometimes find it very easy to throw kids away.  It is usually much easier to lock them up and forget about them than it is to correct the damage.  No doubt there are problems with the juvenile justice system in any country, and there are no simple answers, nor is there any one answer that fits every situation.  But most of the time (again, not always) when kids commint a violent crime, there was something that made them that way.  Often the source of the problem can be identified and the kid can be turned around.  But it takes a bit time and energy and a huge amount of understanding and compassion and patience to do so.\n\nA society is known by how it treats those who most need help.
266001
As a parent, I think it is a great idea. I think offenders should be put to death after the first conviction. JR.
727579
Have you thought about big brothers/big sisters.  They are a great organization and could really help out in your situation.  It is extremely important that you get some type of male role model in his life.  \nReports show that approximately 85% of youth in prison, 85% of children with behavioral disorders, 75% of adolescents in substance abuse treatment centers, 71% of all high school dropouts, and 70% of adults serving long-term prison sentences come from fatherless homes.  Fatherless children average significantly higher in terms of teen suicide, illegitimate birthrates, incarceration and unemployment. 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.  90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes and 85% of all children that exhibit serious behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes.  Because only a portion of each age group grew up in a fatherless home, these statistics mean that children from fatherless homes are 5 times more likely to commit suicide, 9 times more likely to drop out of high school, 10 times more likely to abuse drugs, 20 times more likely to end up in prison and to have behavioral disorders, and 32 times more likely to run away than their peers who grow up in intact families with both birth parents.  These trends persist even when socioeconomic factors are controlled for.