Probation in Ninja attack
Review the article Teen Gets Probation in Ninja Attack.
What circumstances do you think contributed to the decision of the chosen dispositional option? Was the decision fair?
What goal(s) would have been accomplished by incarcerating the youth?
If you were the judge, how would you have sentenced the youth?
What would have been a fair disposition for an adult facing the same situation? How would an adult have been treated compared to the juvenile?
In response to your peers, provide one additional disposition to consider if they had been the judge on the case. Justify your response with course readings.
To complete this assignment, review the Discussion Rubric document.
Peer 1
The case of “teen Gets Probation in Ninja Attack” the cased involved teenage boys. A 17-year-old struck a 14-year-old with a weapon ninja like a style. The circumstance that contributed to the decision of the disposition are as follows, the 17-year-old boy was arrest and held in a detention facility since the attack took place. According to the article prior to the trial “the boy has undergone psychological evaluations, and officials have deemed him a low risk and low needs. Because he has demonstrated exemplary behavior throughout the pretrial period.” (Fidlin, 2010) This gave the court of a recommendation to not keep the boy in a detention facility. A deal was met before the case began, leaving the boy with probation until the age of 18 with many outlining rules, and both the victim and defendant agree to the judges’ decision.
Now was the decision fair I believe it was, The victim father stated that “We don’t want to see this young man go to jail,” the man said in court. “But we hope everyone has learned something from this. It could have been a lot worse.” (Fidlin, 2010) An agreement was met by both parties after evaluations by professionals, who also agree that incarnation was not a good option. This facts alone would justify the decision and either juvenile life was destroy in the overall circumstances.
The only goal that incarcerations would have accomplished would be to make the 17-year-old boy an example of. This case involved the use of a deadly weapon that may have resulted in a murder. The child seems to influenced very easily and would not hesitate to use a weapon again. Incarceration would also accomplish the safety of other children in the community.
If I were the judge, strictly based on facts on the psychologist and the agreement with both parties I would have to agree, considering the sentences both satisfied both parties. Yet, I also look at the fourth question and realize that if the juvenile would have been 18 years of age or older (adult) the case would have been treated very differently. No adult would have been given probation for an assault charge with a delay weapon. We have to look at the fact that an adult and a juvenile are treated differently regarding the same case.
I do understand that in a way I am going back and forth with my answer, but this case is a difficult one considering all of the given circumstances.
Good Luck everyone with the rest of your class and careers.
Alex
Fidlin, D. (2010, August 06). Teen gets probation in ‘ninja’ attack. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/
Peer 2
There were several circumstances that contributed to the decision of probation and being released to the custody of his parents. The incident occurred on April 27, 2010, around June 15, 2010 there was a hearing to determine if the juvenile could be released from confinement to his parents prior to the trial. The juvenile had been detained since the incident in a detention center and then a secure shelter. The judge stated that the juvenile had followed rules and been compliant while at the detention center and shelter. The judge released the juvenile to his parents restricting him to the home, except for appointments while accompanied by his parents. He was also not to be interacting with the community. The court was also waiting for additional police reports and the results of a psychological examination. (Buckley, 2010) On August 6, 2010, the day the trial was to start a plea agreement was reached and the judge rendered his decision. The victim’s father did not want the juvenile to go to jail and that his family was comfortable with the decision. Four months after the incident, the victim had healed well. (Fidlin, 2010)
Confinement of juveniles can lead to labeling and learning new delinquent techniques be associating with other delinquents. Most youth will cease to engage in delinquent behavior over time and longer confinement is not correlated with a decrease in re-offending. (as cited in Benekos, Champion, & Merlo, pp. 350-351, 2016) The healing of the victim, sympathy from the victim’s family, time served in confinement, the adherence to the rules while in custody and pre-trial release, and the psychological evaluation results all contributed to the judge’s decision to release the juvenile on probation with other restrictions. I believe that this was a fair resolution.
The goals of the juvenile justice corrections are deterrence, rehabilitation and reintegration, retribution and punishment, and incapacitation and control. (Benekos, Champion, & Merlo, p. 336, 2016) The offender’s experience of incapacitation in two types of confinement serves most of these elements. The offender’s conduct during the probation period and after will assess the rehabilitation and reintegration elements. Serving more time in confinement may not have accomplished the end goal of reducing recidivism for the reasons listed above. If I were to sentence this juvenile, I probably would have given the same disposition with the exception of an extended probation period. In Wisconsin (where the crime occurred) a Class F Felony (charge the juvenile pleaded No Contest to) can have a confinement period of twelve and a half years. It seems like it should have fallen into a Class H or I Felony, in which crimes that involve great or substantial bodily harm generally fall under. (GovernmentRegistry.org, 2019) Those felonies have a confinement period of three and a half to six years.
I am not quite sure what a fair disposition for an adult should be for this crime, due to the lack of information about what actually took place. Prima facie, as listed above, twelve and a half years confinement, a fine of twenty-five thousand dollars, or both would be the punishment for an adult. While it is conceivable for a juvenile to be obsessed with “ninja’s” and have some false sense of duty to protect what they believe is theirs, it is not for an adult, unless suffering from some type of mental incapacitation. Juveniles are treated differently in the criminal justice system than adults. The primary goal for juveniles within the criminal justice system is rehabilitation, for adults it is primarily punishment. An adult conducting the same offense would most likely levied a much harsher disposition.
References
Benekos, P., Champion, D., & Merlo, A. (2016). The juvenile justice system: Delinquency, processing, and the law. Boston: Prentice Hall.
Buckley, M. (2010, June 15). Judge releases boy in ‘ninja’ attack. Retrieved February 26, 2019, from http://archive.
Fidlin, D. (2010, August 6). Teen gets probation in ‘ninja’ attack. Retrieved February 26, 2019, from http://www.baysidenow.
GovernmentRegistry.org. (2019). Wisconsin Felonies. Retrieved February 26, 2019, from http://www.
rubric_discussion_undergrad_12_
Solution preview for the order on probation in Ninja attack
APA
633 words