Answer

Juvenile Court Process Pretrial Trail and Sentencing

Over the years, crime rates have steadily increased due to technological advancement and the rise in immorality in societies. These crimes are punishable by law regardless of the age of the person found guilty (Becker, 2020). The direction is clear that any crime committed within the constitution allows the judiciary to exercise the obligations vested in it. This paper will argue for and against life without parole for a juvenile who has not committed murder.

A life sentence is different from a death sentence since life imprisonment includes serving behind bars for the rest of your life and can be given parole, while death punishment refers to condemning a defendant to death. The Supreme Court ought to diminish its responsibility to juveniles since the defendant is under the legal age of the constitution. Therefore making it harsh for a child to be judged under such laws (Bishop, 2016).

Arguments against include: one, it is possible that the juvenile may have committed the crime out of curiosity and did not have any knowledge that it is legal or not. It is fair if the minor has understood his mistake and is willing to change from the vice done, for example, being given illegal drugs to transport to someone else. No one wouldn’t want to make extra cash, more so with the current economic times (Hoesterey, 2017). Two, crimes such as fighting, bullying, or stealing are stages everyone passes in life; hence prison without parole would be very unfair since most people, if not all, have committed these crimes in one way or another.

Arguments for include: cases where the juvenile has been sentenced multiple times without any change. The youth may have become a crook, and granting parole would be hazardous to society at large. Two, some children have become a burden to the parents by engaging in detrimental behaviors to society. In such case scenarios, it would be fitting if the juveniles are not granted parole (Becker 2020).