Law in Contemporary Society

View   r4  >  r3  ...
DavidGarfinkelFirstPaper 4 - 26 Feb 2010 - Main.DavidGarfinkel
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstPaper"
Line: 6 to 6
 -- By DavidGarfinkel - 25 Feb 2010
Changed:
<
<
During the summer between my third and fourth year of college, I served as a volunteer law clerk for one of the District Attorney’s Juvenile offices. This was my first true introduction to criminal justice, entering with an optimistic mindset about the potentials of this special branch. By the end of the summer, I had become cynical and pessimistic. The purpose of this essay is to question the efficacy of juvenile courts upon examining the outcomes of the system and the potentially true purposes of juvenile justice in light of the contrast between its ideals and actual process. Part of this analysis will be based on my own observations while working for the DA, including my later work in the sex crimes/family violence unit. Unsurprisingly, some of the analysis could also be easily applied to criminal justice in general and other facets of it, like capital punishment.
>
>
During one of my summers in college, I served as a volunteer law clerk for one of the District Attorney's Juvenile offices. This was my first true introduction to criminal justice, entering with an optimistic mindset about the potentials of this special branch, but ending cynical and pessimistic. As a result of my experience, I was able to compare the actual process and outcome to the ideals set forth by the system, and realize what has become its true purpose.
 

Ideals of Juvenile Justice

Changed:
<
<
There are several overarching ideals or purposes of criminal justice. First is justice. The American adversarial system is expected to have a process by which a the prosecution and defense in front of a jury vigorously fight for their respective side, with the hopeful outcome that those who did commit the crime are convicted and those who did not are found not guilty. The next is punishment, which is self-explanatory. The third ideal is removal, in which the justice system removes, generally through incarceration, those who are deemed too dangerous to live among normal society. Finally, criminal justice is supposed to help rehabilitate those who can learn the error of their ways, thereby preventing future crimes.
>
>
There are several overarching ideals or purposes of criminal justice. First is justice. The American adversarial system is expected to have a process by which the prosecution and defense in front of a jury vigorously fight for their respective side, with the hopeful outcome that those who did commit the crime are convicted and those who did not are found not guilty. The next is punishment, which is self-explanatory. The third ideal is removal, in which the justice system removes, generally through incarceration, those who are deemed too dangerous to live among normal society. Finally, criminal justice is supposed to help rehabilitate those who can learn the error of their ways, thereby preventing future crimes.
 
Changed:
<
<
The Juvenile Court system is supposed to reflect these ideals, but adjusted for younger age of the defendants. For justice, a similar process is supposed to be carried out but without the presence of the jury so as to shorten the length of the process and thereby take up less of the juvenile’s life. Punishment occurs, but taken a step down from the normal prison system on the belief that they don’t deserve as harsh or as severe of an environment as their adult counterparts. Juvenile delinquents are removed from society, but primarily to what are known as camps rather than prisons, with the Youth Authority being the last resort. Finally, rehabilitation. This ideal is meant to play the most prominent role, especially when looking at some of the mission statements of the various state systems, and is predicated on the beliefs that juveniles, due to their youth, can be much more easily led down the right path and they are at the age where problems can hopefully be nipped at the bud.
>
>
The Juvenile Court system is supposed to reflect these ideals, but adjusted for the younger age of the defendants. For justice, a similar process is supposed to be carried out but without the presence of the jury so as to shorten the length of the process and thereby take up less of the juvenile’s life. Punishment occurs, but taken a step down from the normal prison system on the belief that they don’t deserve as harsh or as severe of an environment as their adult counterparts. Juvenile delinquents are removed from society, but primarily to what are known as camps rather than prisons, with the Youth Authority being the last resort. Finally, rehabilitation. This ideal is meant to play the most prominent role, especially when looking at some of the mission statements of the various states, and is predicated on the beliefs that juveniles can be much more easily led down the right path and they are at the age where problems can hopefully be nipped at the bud.
 

General Outcome

Changed:
<
<
The outcomes that are expected unfortunately do not seem to match up with reality. Instead of reformed juveniles, we see a large recidivism rate in which many juvenile’s convicted of felony charges already have an arrest record. In addition, many adults who are later arrested for felonies or gang related activities will have been arrested at least once while a juvenile. So instead of nipping the bud, we let the flowers of crime blossom.
>
>
The outcomes that are expected unfortunately do not seem to match up with reality. Instead of reformed juveniles, we see a large recidivism rate in which many juvenile’s convicted of felony charges already have an arrest record. In addition, many adults who are later arrested for felonies or gang related activities will have been arrested at least once before as a juvenile. So instead of nipping the bud, we let the flowers of crime blossom.
 
Changed:
<
<

Subsub 1

>
>

The Reality

 
Changed:
<
<

Subsection B

>
>

Why It Fails

 
Added:
>
>
The question that then arises is why does this particular system fail. One important explanation is that the actual process of Juvenile Courts results in disrespect for the system and prevents the attainment of the system’s goals.
 
Changed:
<
<

Subsub 1

>
>
Instead of the idealized form of justice we expect, juveniles get short changed. During a time when they are being taught about civics, they are brought into a courtroom with no jury, a supposedly fundamental right. The juvenile’s fate is not decided by his peers, but by a judge who most likely fits the stereotype, an older white male who may have not chosen to sit on that court or did so for reasons with no relevance to justice. Instead of an adversarial process, the juvenile is forced to go through what is best described as the DMV of law. Most of the defendants will not have a real trial, but will be processed through by a prosecutor that is doing her mandatory rotation and a public defender with numerous other cases to deal with. And the speed of the process is not shortened, but still takes considerable time, where the juvenile will continue to miss significant amount of school or training.
 
Added:
>
>
The Juvenile System is also selective about who is worth saving. Certain juveniles are deemed so lost that they are tried as adults. Trying such younth as adults has increasingly been shown to make things worse, resulting in a more violent individual. Even among those who are allowed to remain in Juvenile Court, they are still segregated. In addition, the older the juvenile, the harder it is for him to get past criminal offenses stricken, which makes his early adult years even harder. The most notable form this takes is the placing of a strike on the person’s record. So while saying we wish to rehabilitate these minors, we leave a huge scar in the process. And in the end, most will be returned to the elements that help contribute to deviant behavior.
 
Changed:
<
<

Subsub 2

>
>

Its True Purpose Then

 
Deleted:
<
<

Section II

Subsection A

Subsection B

 \ No newline at end of file
Added:
>
>
In light of the actual reality of the system, what purpose does it serve? It is very difficult to argue that it serves justice or rehabilitates those placed into it. Out of the original ideals, it mainly continues to serve as a means of punishment and incapacitation. But there are other purposes it has come to serve. First, it contributes to the mythology of American criminal justice and an easy bandage to society’s problems. As part of the mythos, it convinces the layman that we have a fair and just system that understands the need to treat juveniles differently from adults. As a bandage, it covers up the underlying tumor that represents the problems that serve as the actual causes of juvenile delinquency. It is politically easier to establish a Juvenile Court than deal with the underlying problems of a poor public education system and the causal factors behind the strong correlation between race/class and crime rate. Finally, Juvenile Courts serve as a means of creating a bureaucracy that helps expedites the process of sending juveniles to separate facilities. In reality, the system is designed to legitimize essentially what is a built in version of plea bargaining.

Revision 4r4 - 26 Feb 2010 - 21:38:58 - DavidGarfinkel
Revision 3r3 - 26 Feb 2010 - 19:58:00 - DavidGarfinkel
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM