|
|
| Sentencing of Florida Youth Draws Criticism from Juvenile Justice |
| By Juvenilenet Staff |
| Published: 09/10/2001 |
|
The sentencing of Nathaniel Brazill, 14, in Florida two weeks ago has raised the level of discussion around how to punish violent juvenile offenders and whether or not they should be given a chance to succeed in the juvenile justice system. Brazill shot and killed his teacher in the classroom after the teacher asked that he leave the school. Under Florida law, Brazill could have been sentenced to life in prison for his crime, but the judge in the case sentenced him instead to 28 years behind bars. In a statement to the judge and the court, Brazill said he was sorry for the crime and contended that he accidentally pulled the trigger on the gun. The Juvenile Information Network recently spoke with leaders in the juvenile justice field about the sentencing and the trends it might represent for juveniles. Bill Sturgeon has worked for several justice agencies including the South Carolina Department of Corrections, where he helped institute a plan for managing juveniles adjudicated as adults, and the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice System. He is also the author of No Time to Play, about violent juvenile offenders. David Roush is a director of the National Juvenile Detention Association's Center for research and Professional Development and a professor at Michigan State University. Vincent Schiraldi is president of the Justice Policy Institute. JuvenileNet: What is your reaction to the Brazill sentencing and what does it say about sentencing trends for violent juvenile offenders? Bill Sturgeon: Twenty-eight years in my opinion for a 14 year-old is a life sentence. What he did was a terrible, terrible thing but if we start giving up on kids at 13 and 14 years old, we as a society, have to take a hard look at ourselves. I was really shocked at what happened. Under the law, the judge had to give him 25 years minimum so the judge was locked in. He will go through all his adolescence and his young adulthood in prison and what we will get when he gets out is someone who was raised in a prison. The sentencing structure, once you go over to the adult side, a judge is locked into the adult statutes. If we are going to continue to put kids in adult prisons they are going to have to take a look at sentencing laws and give the judges some leeway because there are extenuating circumstances. We have to get away from the sense of retribution. We have to punish for the crime after all the variables are considered. We have turned a blind eye to all the science we know about mental health and psychological issues [with juveniles.] We want retribution. Everyone wants absolutes with human beings and there aren't. What does society gain by putting him in prison for 28 years? David Roush: There is the prosecutorial part of this case [where the prosecutor decided how Brazill would be sentenced.] The difficulty with the transfer laws [into adult systems] is they sweep whole groups of kids into the adult system and that is a failing of an offense-based system. You end up with a lot more kids in the adult system that shouldn't be there. I don't know that people in juvenile justice are opposed to juvenile transfer laws. The juvenile court has been ready to acknowledge that some kids don't fit the system. [But] the big problem is this just an easy way of getting kids who are problematic and dangerous offenders into the prison system. One of the inherent issues is the more we bring attorneys into the juvenile system the farther we get away form the best interest of the child. There may be a lot of folks who are leaning in the direction of not rehabilitating youth. But you have excellent empirical research that says rehabilitation can be done effectively. There here are a whole host of actors that contribute to the success. Rehabilitating and spending time and energy on troubled kids, particularly kids of color is not a popular thing to be arguing for. Part of it is what can you do to get the education system, the child welfare system and juvenile justice system to work on crime prevention. Kids are looking for structure; they are looking for someone to tell them that something isn't right and we're not going to tolerate that here. Vincent Schiraldi: Nathaniel committed a horrible crime and the teacher didn't deserve to die. That having been said it is a sign of decaying society that treats young teenagers in such a barbaric fashion. [The sentence] is tantamount to giving up on Nathaniel. I don't think we should give up on 14 year-old kids who haven't done anything wrong before. This kid hadn't missed a day of school this year. At times like this we too often lower ourselves to the level of offenders. I don't think 13 year-olds understand their behavior the way 30 year-olds do. (Brazill was 13 when he committed the crime.) We don't think they do in any other branch of the law; you can't vote, stay out after dark, drive, or drink alcohol so why is he culpable [as an adult] for committing this crime? When you put kids like this in an adult system, we all understand that his prospects will be few. In a lot of states you can't be tried at age 13 as an adult and this process hasn't served Florida very well. They went to the prosecutor to decide how a youth should be tried. Research shows that kids in Florida processed through the adult system are arrested more frequently for more serious crimes than similar kids who went through juvenile system. The time they spend in an adult system is dead time at best. |
advertise
|
privacy policy
|
add URL
|
about us
|
terms/disclaimer
|
contact us
|
join our team
|
help
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think