Cynthia H. Roberts
In the early days of our country, young people who broke the law were treated like adults. If a 40-year-old man burned down a barn he could be put to death. If an ll-year-old boy burned down a barn, he too could be put to death. Young people were also put into the same prisons as adults.
That upset many people. They said that most young people in trouble could probably be turned into good citizens if they got the right kind of help.
What was the answer? To set up one court and penal system for adults and another for juveniles. Massachusetts set up the first reform school in 1847. It was called a reform school because it was to re-form, or change, the young people sent there.
In 1899, Illinois started the first system of juvenile courts. Today every state has some form of juvenile courts and reform schools. (Connecticut does not have a separate juvenile court system, but it does have courts responsible for juvenile justice as part of the general court system).
In this unit, students will read about young people under the age of 18. in some ways, these young people are probably a lot like them and their friends. In other ways they may be quite different. For the people they are going to read about have been in trouble with the law. They are just a few of the thousands of young people whom state and local governments call juvenile delinquents.
What does Juvenile delinquently mean? It is a legal phrase, used in courts. The dictionary says a juvenile delinquent can be any young person who behaves in an antisocial way. He or she ‘is beyond parental control and therefore is subject to legal action.‘
How does such a definition apply to real life? Well, people have different ideas about that—just as they have different ideas about what should be done to or for young people who are done to or for young people who are called juvenile delinquents.
Judge Maurice B. Cohill, Jr., a juvenile judge in Pittsburgh, described in a newspaper three cases he had decided. In the article, he argued that it was good that juvenile judges have a wide choice in the way they treat young offenders. After reading the following cases, see if you agree with Judge Cohill’s decisions.
-
1) Beverly was in judge Cohill’s when she was 15. She repeatedly ran away from a home for emotionally disturbed children. There was no doubt that Beverly was emotionally disturbed. She was described as bitter and hostile, and she often banged her head against the wall. The people who ran the home where she lived said they could not keep Beverly any longer. No one knew who her parents were because she had been left in a garbage can when she was an infant. She had already been in three foster homes and an orphanage.
-
2) Nancy, 13, was picked up for shoplifting in a department store. When police couldn’t locate her mother, she was sent to a detention home. There it was discovered that the only person she was close to was a 16-year-old boy with whom she was sexually involved (a juvenile offense in most states). When Nancy’s mother came to her hearing, she at in the back of the courtroom muttering dirty words. The judge thought the mother didn’t know where she was.
-
3) Ken, 14, took an old family car out for a ride without his parents’ permission. He had no driver’s license. He and a friend were riding along the highway when the car went out of control. It smashed head-on into another car, killing the other driver.
Students will think about each case. What do they think should be done about Beverly, Nancy, and Ken? They will discuss their opinions with other classmates.
The Supreme Court Said: 1) Juveniles must be warned that they do not have to testify against themselves or give a confession. 2) Like adults, they are entitled to a lawyer for any offense for which an adult could have one. If they can’t afford a lawyer, the court must furnish one. 3) Juveniles must be told what the charges are against them soon enough to prepare for their hearing. 4) They have a right to confront the witnesses against them and cross-examine them. Witnesses must be sworn in.
Later the Supreme Court made other decisions affecting juvenile courts. In 1970 it said that a juvenile court must find a youth guilty ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,‘ rather than simply because most of the evidence is against the youth. In 1975, the court said that a juvenile could not be tried twice for the same offense. This is a protection adults have always had under the U.S. Constitution.