1 / 15

CASE OF THE DAY

Explore a case where a juvenile faced delinquency for contempt, questioning if criminal proceedings are the solution for family crisis matters. Discover the nuanced interplay between juvenile law, social welfare, and neuroscience in determining adolescent maturity and legal responsibilities. Delve into the complexities of protecting minors' interests and strengthening support systems to prevent legal interventions. Unpack the shifting landscape of juvenile justice, influenced by social constructs of adolescence and evolving punitive measures. Learn how understanding developmental trajectories and cognitive functions can inform legal decision-making. Consider the limitations of neuroscientific evidence in defining maturity thresholds.

cindyb
Download Presentation

CASE OF THE DAY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CASE OF THE DAY • Can a juvenile who has been brought before the court on a “family-in-crisis” petition – a status offender – be adjudicated delinquent for criminal contempt? • State in the Interest of S.S., 367 N.J. Super. 400 (2004) • Facts: • 16 year old female • Lived with parents and 3 siblings • March 2002 petition alleges that she was chronically “staying out late and running away” • “Failed to obey rules at home or in school” • Ordered to obey rules at home and in school and to attend two counseling sessions

  2. May 2002 – parents complained to the Family Court that S.S. failed to come home • June 2002 – Family Court confirmed parents’ complaint, found S.S. in contempt, adjudicated her delinquent • S.S. was placed in custody in a DYFS facility • Court imposed two year probationary term • Issues • Can she be found delinquent for failing to obey a court order regarding “family and school rules”? • YES (NJSA 2C:29-9) - 4th degree misdemeanor for contempt of court • But, should criminal proceedings be used as a means of enforcement of “family in crisis” matters? • Court ruled NO

  3. Arguments • Consequentialist logic– if adjudicated delinquent, S.S. faced placement in secure detention facility, plus the stigma (label and criminal record) that go along with a finding of delinquency (similar to Gault logic) • Because S.S. has not violated any criminal laws and has primarily endangered only herself, Court response should emphasize protection of the minor • State – what recourse does the court have to protect the interests of the minor? • Court ruled that civil proceedings offer the appropriate remedy – including the remedy of incarceration so long as it is limited and rules for release are stipulated. • But this should be a last resort • Court de facto shifts responsibility to social welfare system to strengthen services to address more complicated cases and avoid legal intervention

  4. Juvenile Crime: Explanations and Differences From Adults Class 2

  5. Why Should Statistics Matter? • Law and policy on juvenile crime often are reactions to perceived and real changes in the nature of juvenile crime. There has always been a realist component to the jurisprudence of juvenile justice, and its sensitivity to juvenile crime problems is shown in the rapid pace of law change, particularly with respect to boundaries and punishment schedules • Founding of juvenile court 108 years ago based on ‘science’ of the Progressive Movement • Juvenile law is constantly shifting according to the social construction of adolescence, and there is a constant tension between normative components of “child saving” ideology and the realpolitik of juvenile crime. • Expansion of waiver laws following juvenile gun homicide epidemic of late 1980s and early 1990s, inflamed by ‘superpredator’ rhetoric

  6. Age Curves for Homicide and Auto Theft

  7. Youth Propensity to Arrest (Age 15/Age 24) by Offense, United States 1997 Source: Zimring, American Youth Violence, 1999

  8. Universality of Age Trends Source: Zimring and Fagan, “Two Patterns of Age Progression in Adolescent Criminality,” Ch. 7 in American Juvenile Justice (Zimring, ed.) (2005).

  9. Theory: Kids do crime because they are…..well, kids Pyschosocial Development & Maturity Autonomy (Social) Identity Emotional Regulation Risk Taking Social Judgment Experience and Knowledge Cognitive Functions Thinking and Reasoning Understanding Law Anticipate Consequences Reasoning Impulsivity Peer Influence Legal Socialization The Chicken Game Risk taking without deliberation Peer influences are real Maturational Trajectories

  10. Organic Development • Evidence from Natural Science: there are frontal lobe functions that map to maturity • “Starting the engines without a skilled driver” • Areas of frontal lobe development show largest differences between juveniles and adults • Brain maturation continues well beyond age 18, into the early 20’s • Gray matter peaks in teen years, myelination continues from teen years into early 20s • Slow and uneven development of organizational skills, decision making, and control • So, where is the boundary between adolescence and adulthood?

  11. Limitations of the Science • Based on MRI’s • Longitudinal? Samples? • Tasks? • Recognition of facial emotions • ‘Cold’ v ‘hot’ cognitions • Comparisons? • 13 v 25 ? 12-16 v 23-30 ? • Does this help parse maturity in 16 – 17 – 18 age range, when law differentiates “responsibility” • Specific coordinates for specific functions? • Dispositive ?

  12. Cumulative Rates of Maturation

More Related