Juvenile Justice System example essay topic

"Kids on Death Row" The Juvenile Justice System consists of a more or less integrated network of agencies, institutions, organizations, and personnel that process juvenile offenders. This network is made up of how enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and courts; corrections, probation, and parole services; and public and private community-based treatment programs that provide youth with diverse services. This definition is qualified by the phrase more or less integrated, because the concept of juvenile justice has different meanings for individual states and the federal government. Also, in some jurisdictions, the diverse components are at best loosely coordinated, if they are coordinated at all. Many criminologists and criminal justice professionals express a preference for process rather than system when they refer to juvenile justice. This is because system components.

Furthermore, system implies coordination and coordination annoy juvenile agencies, organizations, and personnel in the juvenile justice system are often inadequate or nonexistent. Children who are physically, psychologically, or sexually abused by parents or other adults in their homes are brought within the scope of juvenile court authority. In law, juveniles are referred to as infants. A legal definition of a juvenile delinquent is any infant of indecent, or immoral conduct, and is in need of treatment, rehabilitation, or supervision. Applied to juvenile matters, parens patriae means that the sovereign is in charge of, makes decisions about, or has responsibility for all matters involving juvenile conduct. The underlying thesis of parens patriae was that the parents are merely the agents of society in the area of childbearing, and that the state has a primary and legitimate interest in the upbringing of its children.

Some of these measures included placement of children in foster homes or their assignment to various work tasks for local merchants Sometimes it makes sense to use the death penalty and sometimes it doesn't make sense to use the death penalty. Accordingly, the torturer should be tortured exactly to the security that he tortured the victim, the rapist should be raped, and the cheater should have an equivalent harm inflicted upon him or her. The criminals deserve such punishment, as it reflects the principle of proportionality. We the state using due process-should execute the murderer because he deserves it.

The state has a face obligation to give people what they deserve, ever as it has a dut 6 y to meet the needs of the observing poor-by helping to create jobs, providing unemployment insurance and welfare-so it has a prima facie duty to purist those who do exit things to follow citizens. One of the reasons that I don't think that the death penalty is good because its too because its too expensive and a lot of innocent people are on death row that doesn't ever deserve it. Estimates of the cost of appealing a single capital case range from $170,000 to $219,000. When an appeal is successful, the state must bear the cost of fighting the death sentence as well as the cost of imprisoning the high price of a capital trial not only when a defendant is sentenced to death, but also when a defendant is acquitted or sentenced to life imprisonment. Only about three out of every ten capital cases calumniate in a sentence of death. For the minority of defendants who do receive a death sentence, we pay for an expensive capital trial and an expensive appeal process.

When an appeal is successful, the state bears the cost of life imprisonment. The sad, shameful fact is that money makes the difference between life and death for many defendants. Far too often, it is not these who commit the most despicable crimes who are sent to death row, but those who luck the money to mount an adequate defense. Money can buy a through investigation of the crime, expert analysis and testimony, a careful search for mitigating factor that may need to be presented during a penalty phase. Most important, money can buy a skillful lawyer. Rich people can afford to select their lawyers, but poor people are at the mercy of the attorney assigned to them.

It is believed that Miguel Angel Martinez shouldn't be on death row. There is not enough evidence found to prove that Miguel did commit the crime. He shouldn't be given the death penalty because he's under aged and a minor. I believe that they should match up the finger print evidence with the Judge son and Venegas to see if the both of them had something to do with the murder. It is also believed that DNA evidence should also be used to solve the crime and figure out who really committed the crime, because it is not right to put an innocent person to death that has no evidence that they are really the person that committed the crime..