CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
One of the most controversial issues in the rights of juveniles today is addressed in the question, "Should the death penalty be applied to juveniles"? For nearly a century the juvenile courts have existed to shield the majority of juvenile offenders from the full weight of criminal law and to protect their entitled "special rights and immunities." In the case of kent vs. United states in 1996, Justice Fortas stated some of these "special rights" which include; Protection from publicity, confinement only to twenty-one years of age, no confinement with adults, and protection against the consequences of adult conviction such as the loss of civil rights, the use of adjudication against him in subsequent proceedings and disqualification of public employment (Kent vs. US 1966:1055). These " special rights and immunities " exist so that the justice courts can provide measures of guidance and rehabilitation for the child along with protection for society. However, there are some youths who are extremely dangerous and do not respond to attempts to reform themselves. The question is, should established mechanisms for transferring or waiving juvenile court jurisdiction in these exceptional cases take aw
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Dorn Gewerth, Judiciary System, Justice Fortas, Common Criminal, Thompson Oklahoma, Kent United, Western European, , Eighth Amendment, English Common, death penalty, criminal courts, juvenile court, dorn gewerth, capital punishment, thompson oklahoma, criminal court, juveniles death penalty, minimum age, capital crimes, special rights, methods transferring juvenile, juvenile criminal courts, furman georgia 1972, thompson oklahoma 1988,
Approximate Word count = 2079
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
