Juvenile Justice is something that concerns us all. I thank God that I have never been close to anyone involved in any manner of atrocity so I can not speak from personal experience. I can speak from a human experience though. I can speak from the position of someone that has been around juveniles all my life and have witnessed over and over again the marvelous transformation they make as they grow to adulthood. A friend of mine use to say it is a miracle anyone makes it through their teenage years because they make so many dumb choices. Amen to that.
Fortunately most of the dumb choices are relatively harmless and only a minor percentage of them are egregious enough to warrant prison time but how can we, the people of Massachusetts, think that the actions and behaviors of a teenager should define him or her for life? All of the evidence tells us their brains are not fully developed until well into their twenties. They are not to be excused for making bad choices but neither should they be permanently defined by it.
“On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court issued an historic ruling in Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs holding that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for all children 17 or younger convicted of homicide are unconstitutional.” http://www.eji.org/childrenprison/deathinprison The Spremem Court ruled that mandatory life without parole for juveniles is unconstitution. How did we need the Supreme Court to tell us that? ““Simply put, because the brain of a juvenile is not fully developed, either structurally or functionally, by the age of eighteen, a judge cannot find with confidence that a particular offender, at that point in time, is irretrievably depraved,” the court wrote. “Therefore, it follows that the judge cannot ascertain, with any reasonable degree of certainty, whether imposition of this most severe punishment is warranted...Given the unique characteristics of juvenile offenders, they should be afforded, in appropriate circumstances, the opportunity to be considered for parole suitability,” the court wrote in its decision.
The Massachusetts legislature has taken up the charge to come up with a reasonable plan to offer these people an opportunity for parole. Last week the House of Representatives voted 128-16 to pass bill H4184. “Under terms of the bill that the House passed on Wednesday, juveniles convicted of murders that involved premeditated malice or extreme atrocity or cruelty would be parole eligible after serving 25 to 30 years in prison. Juveniles convicted of committing a first-degree felony murder between their 14th and 18th birthdays would be eligible after serving 20 to 25 years in prison.”
“Also, H.4184 bill would allow the Parole Board to impose a 10-year wait –double the current 5-year setback – before an individual who has been denied parole can go before the board again. THIS UNPRECEDENTED TEN YEAR SETBACK APPLIES TO ALL PERSONS SERVING LIFE SENTENCES – THOSE SENTENCED AS ADULTS AS WELL AS THOSE SENTENCED AS JUVENILES.” http://jeantrounstine.com/?p=1968#
See https://malegislature.gov/Bills/BillHtml/137483?generalCourtId=11 for the full text of the bill.
While 20 - 30 years prior to parole hearing is certainly an improvement over a life sentence, it is still an unusually cruel sentence to give a 14 - 17 year old. A kid that was still in the midst of a crucial aspect of brain development, the piece that would help guide decision making. “...Gail Garinger, the state’s child advocate, voiced concerns that juveniles convicted of first-degree murder would wait too long before becoming eligible for parole under the House proposal. It doesn’t give sufficient recognition to how juveniles are different from adults,” she said.” And what is the point of doubling the 5 year wait time to 10 years? Has there been evidence that this action is warranted?
According to Citizens for Juvenile Justice, we still have time to impact the Senate Bill. They put out a call asking us to call our Senators and tell them the following:
*1. Youth should have an initial opportunity to seek parole no later than 15 YEARS into their sentence. REMEMBER: Eligibility is NOT a guarantee to secure parole, just an opportunity to be reviewed!
2. Everyone should be eligible for further parole hearings, if needed, no later than every 5 YEARS.”
3. This bill is inconsistent with the SJC's decision in Diatchenko, and would result in de facto life sentences for young people.
See below for phone numbers of Senators, please call them and voice your opinion on this important topic.
These recommendations seem reasonable to me. Give the kids a chance to show if they have redeemed themselves. But we should also make a greater effort to provide opportunities for redemption, help work on social and civic skills as well as skills for employment upon release. When we lock up teenagers and release them 15, 20, 25 years later as adults, we better make sure they have the opportunity to be successful productive members of society unless we want to send them right back.
These recommendations seem reasonable to me. Give the kids a chance to show if they have redeemed themselves. But we should also make a greater effort to provide opportunities for redemption, help work on social and civic skills as well as skills for employment upon release. When we lock up teenagers and release them 15, 20, 25 years later as adults, we better make sure they have the opportunity to be successful productive members of society unless we want to send them right back.
“The special education John [Odgren] needed was too expensive for his school district, though the state will spend about $2.5 million to imprison him for the rest of his life.” http://bit.ly/1nHkeHF
In a related but separate case, in September 2013 Governor Deval Patrick raised the age a juvenile can be tried as an adult from 17 to 18. I was at the State House when Middlesex Sheriff Peter Koutoujian recited the statistics from his jail. Unfortunately I don’t remember all he said but I do remember being amazed and saddened to listen to him describe the inmates in his jail. The majority of them have mental health and/or substance abuse issues that were never adequately treated and a large number of them do not have viable job skills. He is trying to address these issues in his jail but why are we warehousing our underserved population in jail rather than getting them the help they need before they find themselves in jail? It would be a much more effective use of taxpayer money. Not to mention it is ‘the right thing to do’.
Senate Judiciary Chair, William Brownsberger (D., Belmont):
617-722-1280, William.Brownsberger@masenate.gov
Senate Chair of Ways & Means, Stephen Brewer (D. Barre): 617-722-1540, Stephen.Brewer@masenate.gov
President Therese Murray (D. Plymouth):
617-722-1500, Therese.Murray@masenate.gov
Majority Leader Stanley C. Rosenberg (D. Amherst):
617-722-1532, Stan.Rosenberg@masenate.gov
President Pro Tempore Richard T. Moore (D. Uxbridge):
617-722-1420, Richard.Moore@masenate.gov
Senate Majority Whip Karen E. Spilka (D. Ashland):
617-722-1640, Karen.Spilka@masenate.gov
More reading:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2014/06/23/juveniles-convicted-felony-murder-should-get-earlier-parole-hearings/9VC8NJTFSAPMhGdy7lEJuI/story.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/opinion/racial-disparities-in-the-juvenile-justice-system.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytopinion&_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/opinion/racial-disparities-in-the-juvenile-justice-system.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytopinion&_r=0
No comments:
Post a Comment