Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently?

Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently? http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,110232,00.html

When a child kills, does he instantly become an adult? Or does he maintain some trappings of childhood, despite the gravity of his actions?

These are the questions plaguing the American legal system today, as the violent acts of juvenile offenders continue to make headlines.

Wednesday, 14-year-old Nathaniel Brazill was found guilty of second-degree murder for killing his English teacher last year. The charge usually carries a prison term of up to 30 years, but Brazille's defense team is hopeful the sentencing judge will be more lenient in this case. They have a powerful ally: Jeb Bush. "There is a different standard for children," the governor said after Brazill was sentenced. "There should be some sensitivity that a 14-year-old is not a little adult."

In March, another Florida jury sentenced14-year-old Lionel Tate, who killed a younger girl while practicing wrestling moves on her, to life in prison without parole. The concurrent Brazill and Tate trials served to heighten the public misconception that juvenile violent crime is on the rise; in fact, recent figures show a precipitous drop over the last five years.

Are we seeing a drop because children are thinking more carefully about their crimes, knowing they could receive adult sentences? All but five states allow children of any age charged with murder to be tried as adults. The death penalty generally isn't an option — at least not for defendants under the age of 16; The U. S. Supreme Court has ruled capital punishment unconstitutional for anyone who hasn't celebrated their 16th birthday. Some states, however, will consider 16- and 17-year-olds for the death penalty.

Or are there other factors? Defense attorneys might offer a different argument: Since the bulk of the drop-off in juvenile crime predates most states' embrace of harsher penalties for young offenders, it is disingenuous to assume any connection between the two.

The fundamental question is, are children capable of understanding the consequences of their actions? Maybe not; recent studies suggest that the brain's prefrontal lobe, which some scientists speculate plays a crucial role in inhibiting inappropriate behavior, may not reach full development until age 20.

It's unlikely that America's thirst for vengeance will be sated by scientific theory. We are, as a nation, very much in favor of treating child criminals as adults — a recent ABC news poll showed 55 percent of us believe the crime, not the perpetrator's age, should be the determining factor in sentencing.

Below, a few of the arguments posited by both sides of the juvenile crime debate. At the end, there is an email address; we invite you to send us your comments. Let us know what you think.

Should the U.S. justice system treat juvenile violent offenders as adults?

The end result of a heinous crime remains the same, no matter who commits it. Our justice system depends upon holding perpetrators responsible for their actions.

Harsh sentencing acts as a deterrent to kids who are considering committing crimes. Trying children as adults has coincided with lower rates of juvenile crimes. Light sentences don't teach kids the lesson they need to learn: If you commit a terrible crime, you will spend a considerable part of your life in jail.

Kids today are more sophisticated at a younger age; they understand the implications of violence and how to use violent weapons. It is absurd to argue that a modern child, who sees the effect of violence around him in the news every day, doesn't understand what killing really is. The fact that child killers know how to load and shoot a gun is an indicator that they understand exactly what they're doing.

NO The juvenile prison system can help kids turn their lives around; rehabilitation gives kids a second chance. Successful rehabilitation, many argue, is better for society in the long run than releasing someone who's spent their entire young adult life in general prison population. A young person released from juvenile prison is far less likely to commit a crime than someone coming out of an adult facility.

Children don't have the intellectual or moral capacity to understand the consequences of their actions; similarly, they lack the same capacity to be trial defendants.

Children shouldn't be able to get deadly weapons in the first place. Adults who provide kids with guns used in violent crimes should be held at least as accountable as the kids themselves.

It's remarkably easy to find a seasoned defense lawyer who believes the current system is too vulnerable to racism: Statistically, black juvenile offenders are far more likely to be transferred to adult courts (and serve adult time) than their white peers who've committed comparable crimes.

Kids should never be tried as adults By Robert Schwartz , Special to CNN February 18, 2010 8:32 a.m. EST Editor's note: Robert Schwartz co-founded the Juvenile Law Center in 1975 and has been its executive director since 1982. The center is a nonprofit public interest law firm that uses the law to ensure that youths in the foster care and justice systems are treated fairly and have opportunities to become productive adults. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- About 20 years ago, 9-year-old Cameron Kocher fired a rifle out of a window of his home in upstate Pennsylvania and hit his 7-year-old neighbor, who was riding on a snowmobile, and killed her. The prosecutor decided to try the 9-year-old as an adult. When the charge is murder, Pennsylvania is one of a handful of states that has no lower age limit for trying children as adults. The district attorney argued that Cameron had lied when asked about the shooting -- and lying is something that adults do. The trial judge subsequently agreed to keep Cameron's case in adult court. The boy had seemed normal, the judge said, so there was nothing for the juvenile justice system to treat. Cameron had also dozed during pretrial motions, which showed "a lack of remorse." Cameron stayed home on bail -- which is available to "adults" -- while his case was argued in appellate courts. He eventually pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and was placed on probation. He received no treatment and had no further involvement with the justice system. Jump ahead 20 years, to the Western Pennsylvania prosecution of Jordan Brown, who was 11 when he was charged as an adult with shooting to death his father's pregnant fiancée. Jordan's attorneys have asked the trial judge to remand his case to juvenile court. The judge has taken the motion under advisement. It should be an easy decision. There are common-sense reasons to keep Jordan in the juvenile system. Ask any parents of an 11-year-old if they think their child is really just a small adult! If Jordan is adjudicated delinquent, the juvenile justice system can keep him until his 21st birthday. That is an extraordinary amount of time for an 11-year-old. It is certainly long enough to serve the needs of public protection, and enough time to rehabilitate a child. Indeed, studies routinely show that in these cases, the juvenile justice system protects the public better than the criminal justice system. If common sense isn't enough, examine the recent science on adolescent development. In the early part of the decade, researchers for the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice found that teenagers are less blameworthy than adults, and that their capacities change significantly over the course of adolescence. The researchers found what many of us were trying to say years earlier about Cameron Kocher: that at the age of 9, he simply couldn't process information and plan a crime like an adult. The MacArthur Foundation Research Network recognized that legal sanctions for misbehavior should not be based only on the harm a youth causes, but on the youth's culpability. Most people would agree. Every day, different defendants receive different sentences even if they caused the same harm. This is because defendants differ in culpability, or blameworthiness. At no other time are these differences more pronounced than during adolescence, when youths struggle with their immaturity, undeveloped decision-making abilities, impulsiveness, lack of future orientation and susceptibility to negative peer pressure. Recent brain imaging technology reinforces the adolescent development literature. From the prefrontal cortex to the limbic area, the teenage brain is undergoing dramatic changes during adolescence in ways that affect teens' ability to reason, to weigh consequences for their decisions and to delay gratification long enough to make careful short- and long- term choices. In their 2008 book "Rethinking Juvenile Justice," MacArthur researchers Dr. Laurence Steinberg and Elizabeth Scott concluded that young people under age 15 should never be tried as adults. Steinberg and Scott make clear that mitigation because of youth -- the fact that teens are less blameworthy than adults -- is not the same as an excuse. That is, trying youths in juvenile court is not the same as absolving them of responsibility. Ten years under juvenile court supervision, for an 11-year-old, is a very long time. The point is that while youths should be punished for their crimes, it should be done in a developmentally appropriate way. Any parent would know that it makes little sense to punish a 10-year-old the same as a 17-year-old. Another finding of the MacArthur Research Network was that young adolescents are not competent enough to be defendants. Young teens lack the skills to consult with their lawyers and shape trial strategy. Think of Cameron Kocher, who couldn't even stay awake for his pretrial motions. Imagine Jordan Brown, now all of 12 years old, advising his lawyer on approaches to cross-examining witnesses, or discussing the pros and cons of pleading guilty. It is in society's enlightened self-interest to keep young teens in the juvenile justice system, where public safety concerns can be addressed and young offenders can be held accountable and be rehabilitated. This is common sense. An 11-year- old is not an adult and should never be treated like one. The opinions in the commentary are solely those of Robert Schwartz. The Juvenile Law Center, which he heads, filed a friend of the court brief in Cameron Kocher's case in 1989 and is not involved in the Jordan Brown case. Jessica Ridgeway Murder-Dismemberment Suspect Wanted to Be a Mortician: Friends By HOWARD BREUER 11/06/2012 at 06:30 PM EST

Austin Sigg's behavior seemed to change about a year ago, when the Colorado teen became more emotional and argumentative, showed an interest in crime scene investigation and bypassed his senior year of high school to study mortuary sciences in college, friends and classmates recall.

But it wasn't until Sigg was arrested in the Oct. 5 kidnapping, sexual assault, murder, and dismemberment of 10-year-old Jessica Ridgeway, an attack that horrified and devastated families in the Denver area and across the country, that some friends, upon reflection, saw those behavioral shifts in a darker light.

"When I learned it was Austin, every single memory that gave insight to him doing it flashed into my head like a strobing movie," says Ash, 17, a close friend of Sigg's who asked that his full name not be used because Sigg's friends have been getting harsh comments on Facebook.

Authorities say they have DNA evidence and a confession from Sigg, who, according to reports, directed police to Ridgeway's body parts under his mother's house. On Oct. 30, he was charged as an adult with 17 counts involving the assault on Ridgeway and an attack on a 22-year-old jogger who got away.

But little has been offered so far to explain what may have driven Sigg to commit such a horrifying crime. Experts say that it is rare for the murderer of a child to also dismember the victim, rarer still when the perpetrator is only a teen.

"He was completely harmless and non-threatening when I knew him," says classmate Joe Sanchez, 18, who spent time with Sigg and his girlfriend around Standley High School, at the Westminster Promenade and at the pool at the community rec center. "He went to school like any other student and did the work as well, he sat on the floor at lunch with his friends and was like any other kid."

But friends say they saw a change in Sigg about two years ago. "He became distant, more aggressive, more antisocial, and more dominative," says Ash, 17.

Austin Caisse, 17, a classmate since elementary school, says they frequently argued over such silly things as who was the cooler Austin or who had the better knife collection, but Caisse always figured Sigg "was more bark than bite."

But he stopped talking to Sigg roughly a year ago, when Sigg seemed to become even more of a hothead amid problems at school and at home.

Other students picked on Sigg over his dark choices in clothing, his voice and his sometimes-abrasive personality, says Caisse. Sigg’s father has been in and out of legal trouble and his mother had financial problems and a history of divorce, reports CBS4 in Denver.

Sigg dropped out in his junior year and got his GED so he could go to Arapahoe Community College "because he was pursuing his desire to be a mortician," says Caisse. The school confirms Sigg is a student there, but says he hadn't yet taken enough classes to enter the mortuary sciences program.

And to get his GED, Sigg attended nearby Warren Tech, where he showed an interest in forensic science and, in March, placed second in the CSI division of a statewide leadership conference.

A few months later, when Jacqueline Miller shared a Psychology 101 class with Sigg at Arapahoe, she recalls Sigg seeming particularly intrigued with her case study on serial killer Ted Bundy, she told The Denver Post.

She says that as she recalled how Bundy had no empathy for his victims, Sigg laughed to himself. "He was so lit up about what I was saying," Miller said. "He was asking about it. He was intrigued. It was almost like he was excited about it."

Sigg's defense attorney has not returned calls seeking comment. The only Sigg family member to comment, his father Robb Sigg, would only say that his "thoughts and prayers are with the Ridgeway family."

Should Juvenile Offenders Be Tried as Adults?

Read Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently? Complete the following chart with reasons to support each position: Juveniles SHOULD be charged as adults Juveniles SHOULD NOT be charged as adults Read “Kids should never be tried as adults” List Schwartz’s reasons why children shouldn’t be tried as adults:

Read “Jessica Ridgeway Murder-Dismemberment Suspect Wanted to Be a Mortician: Friends” and list any important observations about Austin Sigg that may be of importance to the case

Create a chart listing the reasons for and against charging Austin Sigg as an adult. You will need to be creative. Think about what arguments the defense attorneys may make. Also consider the arguments made my: Jessica Ridgeway’s Parents, Prosecuting attorneys, Austin Sigg’s Parents, Community Members, Psychologists….. Sigg SHOULD be charged as an adult Sigg SHOULD NOT be charged as an adult