When juveniles are charged with serious crimes, the justice system sometimes decides to try them as adults, placing them in the adult criminal court system rather than juvenile court. This practice has sparked intense legal, social, and ethical debates. Cases where minors face adult prosecution are often controversial and complex, involving questions of maturity, accountability, and the purpose of punishment. While juvenile courts emphasize rehabilitation, adult courts prioritize retribution and deterrence. Understanding how and why juveniles are tried as adults requires examining key cases, legal standards, and the implications on young offenders and society at large.
Legal Background of Juveniles Tried as Adults
The Transfer Process
In the United States and other jurisdictions, there are several legal mechanisms that allow juveniles to be transferred to adult court. These include:
- Judicial Waiver: A juvenile court judge has the discretion to waive the case to adult court based on specific criteria such as the severity of the crime or the juvenile’s criminal history.
- Prosecutorial Discretion: In some states, prosecutors can decide whether to file the case in juvenile or adult court, especially in severe offenses.
- Statutory Exclusion: Certain crimes are automatically excluded from juvenile court jurisdiction and must be filed in adult court by law.
Key Legal Criteria
Judges often consider the following factors when determining if a juvenile should be tried as an adult:
- Age of the juvenile at the time of the offense
- Nature and seriousness of the offense
- Juvenile’s prior delinquency record
- Amenability to rehabilitation within the juvenile system
Notable Cases of Juveniles Tried as Adults
Case Study: Lionel Tate
In 2001, Lionel Tate became the youngest American citizen ever sentenced to life in prison without parole. At age 12, he killed a 6-year-old girl in what he claimed was a wrestling accident. The case drew national attention and criticism for the harshness of treating a child as an adult. His sentence was later overturned, and he was released after serving three years.
Case Study: Jordan Brown
Jordan Brown was 11 years old when he was charged with shooting his father’s pregnant fiancée in Pennsylvania. Initially charged as an adult, the case raised questions about the fairness of the adult criminal system for very young offenders. Eventually, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that he should have been tried as a juvenile, and he was released in 2016 after spending several years in detention.
Case Study: Nathaniel Brazill
Nathaniel Brazill, age 13, shot and killed his teacher in Florida in 2000. He was tried as an adult and sentenced to 28 years in prison. His case became a symbol of the ‘get tough on crime’ era that dominated juvenile justice policies in the 1990s and early 2000s.
Arguments in Favor of Trying Juveniles as Adults
Accountability for Serious Crimes
Proponents argue that juveniles who commit violent crimes should face consequences equivalent to those of adults. They emphasize that serious offenses such as murder, rape, or armed robbery show intent and awareness, regardless of age.
Public Safety and Deterrence
Trying juveniles as adults is seen as a way to protect society and deter others from committing similar acts. Harsh penalties are believed to reduce repeat offenses and send a message that violent crime has severe consequences.
Victims’ Rights
Families of victims often demand justice that they feel juvenile court cannot provide. They may see adult sentencing as a fair response to tragic losses and believe it ensures closure and proportionality.
Criticism and Challenges
Developmental Differences
Neuroscience shows that adolescents’ brains are still developing, particularly in areas related to impulse control and decision-making. Critics argue that holding juveniles to adult standards of accountability ignores these biological facts.
Higher Recidivism Rates
Research indicates that juveniles tried and sentenced in adult courts are more likely to reoffend than those kept within the juvenile system. Adult incarceration exposes them to hardened criminals, abuse, and less rehabilitative support.
Racial Disparities
There are significant racial disparities in the application of adult charges to juveniles. Minority youth, particularly Black and Hispanic males, are more likely to be tried as adults compared to their white peers for similar offenses.
International Standards and Human Rights Concerns
Many international bodies, including the United Nations, oppose the practice of trying juveniles as adults. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which most countries have ratified, emphasizes rehabilitation and prohibits life imprisonment without parole for minors. The United States has faced criticism for violating these norms.
Reforms and Alternative Approaches
Raise the Age Campaigns
Several states have enacted Raise the Age legislation, increasing the minimum age at which a juvenile can be automatically transferred to adult court. These efforts aim to keep more youth in the juvenile system and reduce long-term negative outcomes.
Blended Sentencing
Blended sentencing allows courts to impose both juvenile and adult sentences. If the juvenile completes their rehabilitation successfully, the adult sentence may be suspended. This approach balances accountability with second chances.
Community-Based Interventions
Programs focused on education, counseling, mentorship, and family engagement have proven effective in addressing the root causes of juvenile delinquency without resorting to adult punishment.
The issue of juveniles tried as adults remains deeply controversial. While society must address violent crimes with seriousness, it must also consider the unique nature of youth development, potential for rehabilitation, and long-term consequences. Balancing justice for victims with compassion and understanding for young offenders is not simple, but it is essential. Legal systems worldwide continue to evolve, seeking approaches that are both effective and humane.