What are the differences in juvenille and adult court systems? Do juvenilles have more rights than adults?

Question

What sort of legal rights do juvenille's have today? Are the courts equal? Should they even be equal?? What are your thoughts?

Answer 1

There are several differences. In once sense, juveniles have more rights in that besides having the right to the presence of an attorney, they also have the right to have their parent present during any questioning. The other main protection of the juvenile justice system is that, in many places, it is a closed hearing. None of the reports, none of the testimony, nothing about the disposition of the case are ever made public.

The one significant right that they do not have is the right to a jury trial.

Whether or not the courts are equal depends upon the judges more than the system.

My main change would be that, while I think the records should be closed upon reaching the age of majority, I think the disposition of the case should be public at the time. I think hiding the consequences of a juvenile committing an offense undermines the ability of the system to have an impact on other juveniles. I also think that there should be more significant sanctions on juvenile offenders short of incarceration. I think it would make a big impact on some of these offenders (and some of the wannabes who look up to them) if instead of getting to spend Friday night out pulling pranks they had to tell their friends -- sorry, can't hang out with you but I have to go wax the floor at all of the churches in town.

Answer 2

The greatest inequality in todays court system between non-adult and adult offenders is two-fold... non-adult offenders (mostly) get expunged record at 18, and non-adult offenders are not eligible for several adult charges.

Having been a youth offender (although never arrested, much less formally charged), I am inclined to say that the youth offense system is bullsh*t. Do the crime, do the time. All of the so-called 'underage' offenders know that their actions are wrong. They are either acting to establish a reputation, or are so apathetic to their own outcome that they have no emotion toward their own incarceration.

If a kid doesn't know any better, fine. Prove to me your 16-year-old doesn't have the mental capacity of a 4-year-old... I'll let him go home, under medical supervision. But try telling me your 16-year-old doesn't know any better because he's not a 'real adult...suceptible to outside influences', and I'll do my d*mnest to see your kid get 15 to 30 in a place where he'll be signing soprano and pleasuring his cellmate until he's 46.

Youth court is a joke.

Answer 3

In the United States and most countries with English Common Law basis, breaking the law requires that someone consent to doing so, or know that they are breaking the law. Juveniles, or minors, are not legally capable of consent, and therefore, they are not held fully responsible for their actions.

Another rationale behind this is that children are also seen as more vulnerable to making mistakes, and are given more discretion to make "youthful indescetions" that shouldn't mess up their legal adult lives.

This reasoning erodes when dealing with violent crimes such as rape and murder.

In my opinion, minors being "charged as adults" is bull. This practice should be unconstitutional. If the law is going to draw a line, it should be consistent, to not do so introduces the opportunity for bias and prejudice against the accused. If people believe that minors are aware of their actions, they should start a movement to lower the age of consent to what they feel is appropriate.

Answer 4

They have considerably fewer rights but a few more protections. The lines are starting to blur though as more juveniles are tried as adults for various crimes. While some of the crimes are pretty heinous, changing a child's legal classification to adult is an extreme measure in my opinion. I am honestly torn on the issue. While some of the kids tried as adults seem to be monsters, the act of treating them as adults in our legal system pretty well guarantees that if they are not monsters, they will be.