Discussion 11
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Ashford University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
122
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by slbnclb2010
Discussion 11: Police Interrogations
Discussion Topic
Task: Reply to this topic
Due October 11 at 12:59 AM
Available on Oct 4, 2021 12:01 AM. Submission restricted before availability starts.
Consider the three amendments to regulate police interactions (5, 6, and 14). Select one of the “Case in
Points” or “Crosscurrents” from Chapter 12 and summarize the point:
A 15 year old John Haley was arrested and questioned by police without the presence of an adult and
without being read his rights. It was also alleged that he was beaten by police and also visitation with his
mother was denied for nearly a week. He wasn’t even formally charged until three days after he
confession. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
As a result, Haley v. Ohio (1948) “ The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the decision, holding that “the
Fourteenth amendment prohibits the police from using the private, secret custody of either man or child
as a device for wringing confessions from them.” (Fuller, 2015)
Juvenile suspects need due-process rights even though the philosophy of the system is rehabilitation
rather than punishment. This is to ensure that their rights are not violated regardless of the philosophy
of the system. Even though juveniles were not afforded constitutional rights before this case, it seems
logical that they should be as well as receiving due process. The arrest of John Haley and the fact that he
was coerced by police makes it clear of why juveniles also need these protections. Regardless the age of
the defendant, their rights should never be violated, and they should be afforded the same rights as
anyone else. If they were not afforded these protections, the police could obtain information from
juveniles by any means, including coercion.
Fuller, J. R. (2015). Juvenile Delinquency. [Columbia College]. Retrieved from
https://ccis.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780190280727/
Initial posts are due by 11:59 pm CT Wednesday, and response posts are due by 11:59 pm CT Sunday.
Discussion 12: Trying Juveniles as Adults
Discussion Topic
Task: Reply to this topic
Due October 11 at 12:59 AM
Available on Oct 4, 2021 12:01 AM. Submission restricted before availability starts.
Considering the purpose of the juvenile justice system, respond to the following questions with
academic support. First, describe the three provisions to try juveniles as adults. Second, what four issues
must be decided through a waiver hearing? Third, what are the advantages and disadvantages of trying
juveniles as adults?
The three provisions to try juveniles as adults as mentioned in the text are, concurrent jurisdiction,
legislative waiver and judicial waiver. Concurrent jurisdiction is when the courts are given a chance to
hear a case and can determine if the case should be heard in adult or juvenile court. (Fuller,2015)
Legislative waiver is for offenses that are more severe, such as rape and murder and are directly charged
in adult court. (2015) Judicial waiver is when a case is sent to adult court by a judge and the juvenile
protection is withdrawn. (2015)
The issues that must be decided through a waiver hearing are as follows: prosecution commencement,
which starts with the filing of a complaint or an indictment in written form, initial appearance, is when a
defendant is informed of the charges against them and also provided a copy of the charges are provided
and bail is set by a judge, Bail is used to guarantee that the defendant will appear in court, and grand
jury is used to determine the probable cause of a felony. (2015)
There are some advantages and disadvantages of trying juveniles in adult court. Some of the advantages
of trying juveniles as adults are that the defendants are punished accordingly based on the severity of
the crime. Juveniles are taught accountability for their crimes when they are punished more severely. It
can also minimize the juveniles committing more crimes as well as possibly eliminate the threshold of
severe crimes committed by juveniles.
Some of the disadvantages are that juveniles have less
opportunities for rehabilitation when dealt with in adult courts. The juveniles are also being exposed to
an environment of more criminals and less chances for change. Adult prisons do not provide the
necessary services that many youth could benefit from.
According to
Frontline: Juvenile Justice
, "The findings suggest that transfer made little difference in
deterring youths from reoffending and adult processing of youths in criminal court actually increases
recidivism rather than [having] any incapacitative effects on crime control and community protection."
(2015)
In fact, when the same offenders were followed for six years after the initial study, researchers found
higher recidivism rates for most juveniles that were transferred to adult criminal court. (2015)
Frontline. Juvenile Justice. (2015) Does Treating Kids like Adults Make a Difference. Retrieved October 5
2021 from https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/stats/kidslikeadults.html
Fuller, J. R. (2015). Juvenile Delinquency. [Columbia College]. Retrieved from
https://ccis.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780190280727/
Discussion 11Contains unread posts
Available on Oct 4, 2021 12:01 AM. Submission restricted before availability starts. Must post first.
After reading about juries and trials in chapter 12 of your text, offer your ideas for improving the jury
trial procedure in the United States.
For example, do you believe there are ways to promote more
objective decision-making by juries?
I think it is important to diversify juries. This means to ensure that juries include all races, genders and
income levels, therefore it is essentially ensured it is a jury of our peers. Studies show that diverse juries
spend more time deliberating and less likely to simply presume guilt. It is also an issue when people
aren’t compensated enough for the time spent on jury duty. In some instances, jurors are only
compensated $15 a day and this isn’t enough for people to be able to survive by having to miss work and
daily activities. By increasing the compensation, it may be more likely that the jury demographics
improve. This would result in more fair verdicts.
The best way to improve juries is to ensure that juries reflect the communities in which they serve and
this is the key to having more fair jury trials and decisions.
San Francisico Bay Times. (2021) The Need to Diversify Juries. Retrieved October 5 2021 from
http://sfbaytimes.com/the-need-to-diversify-juries/
The criminal justice system cannot operate fairly if juries do not reflect the communities they serve. All
San Franciscans, regardless of their race or economic status, deserve an opportunity to serve on a jury.
Let’s give everyone a chance to participate in the justice system without harming their finances by
compensating them fairly for their work.
You must start a thread before you can read and reply to other threads
Discussion 12Contains unread posts
Available on Oct 4, 2021 12:01 AM. Submission restricted before availability starts. Must post first.
Discuss the methods of preventing prejudicial pretrial publicity.
Are there recent examples of celebrated
cases where prejudicial pretrial publicity was a threat to the fair trial guarantee?
What actions were
taken to prevent this?
D12
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Research shows that pretrial publicity does affect jurors’ decisions. As mentioned in an article on the
Reporters Committee, it states that “if a case gets media attention, trial courts may curtail the amount of
pretrial publicity by imposing gag orders, restricting media reporting or closing courtrooms entirely.”
Defendants have Constitutional rights that have to be protected and in some cases, there are threats to
the fair trial guarantee due to pretrial publicity. There is also a freedom of the press, so there is a conflict
between the two.
One of the most recent cases that was highly publicized was the case involving Derek Chauvin. This case
received so much media attention that you would imagine it would be impossible to avoid the jurors not
having emotional beliefs about this case even before the trial began.
The jury during this trial was diverse and consisted of multiple races, different ages and consisted of
male and females. All of the jurors chosen stated that they didn’t have any preconceived ideas about
what caused Mr. Floyd’s death, and a couple of them even stated that they hadn’t even seen the video of
George Floyd’s death.
I think that it is hard to believe that this highly publicized case wasn’t known around the country because
the video was everywhere. I suppose the courts did their best in providing Mr. Chauvin with the least
biased jury as they could, considering the situation.
Sources:
Neubauer, D. & Meinhold, S. Judicial Process: Law, Courts, and Politics in the United States. 7ed,
Cengage, 2016. eText
Reporters Committee. Pretrial Publicity. Retrieved October 5 2021 from
https://www.rcfp.org/