This Saturday 15th August 8-9 PM on It’s A Question Of Balance with Ruth Copland we consider ‘Should Minors Ever Be Tried As Adults?’ Critics of juvenile court argue that the line between juvenile and adult is no longer as clear, that children grow up much quicker these days, and they are more exposed to adult ideas and so they can be responsible for their actions. Barry Krisberg, a University of California, Berkeley criminologist states that there is no way a minor can fully understand what they are doing saying “he might be able to recount the events that resulted, but the notion that he comprehended the consequences of his actions flies in the face of all the science we know.” Scientific research has shown the pre-frontal lobe development is not complete until the early 20s. Teens may have difficulty inhibiting inappropriate behaviors because the circuitry needed for such control is not fully mature. This is something that is frequently put forward as an argument as to why the legal age to consume alcohol should not be lowered. Critics of the juvenile court system state that it is not being successful enough at deterring juvenile crime and this is an argument for a more punitive approach in the criminal courts. Concerns about justice being done for juveniles being tried as adults revolves around whether they can adequately comprehend their Miranda Rights, and the complexities of the legal process, research showing that when tried as an adult juveniles are more likely to waive the right to an attorney and to confess during police interrogations; misunderstand that they have the right to an attorney before and during a police interrogation; and erroneously believe that attorneys only serve innocent defendants. So should minors ever be tried as adults?
What do you think? Ruth Copland gets the views of people on the street for our Out and About feature. Join us on Saturday 8-9 PM! For more info on the show and to hear past shows visit www.itsaquestionofbalance.com
