Discussion 1: Juvenile justice court vs. adult criminal court
During the early 19th century, the United States government sought a solution to prevent mixing young and child offenders from adults and hardened criminals, thus introducing the juvenile delinquency system (Redlich &Bonventre, 2015). Juvenile courts are specifically designed to deal with offences involving minors aged between 10 and 18 years, whereas adult criminal courts prosecute adults who have attained the minimum age of 18. The system varies in different states because some allow 16 and 17 year old juveniles to be tried as adults depending on the nature of the act or crime committed.
The two courts are similar on the account of rights provided to the offenders. In both systems, the juniors and adults have the right to an attorney. They also have the right to confront or challenge, and cross-examine the witnesses presented in court, and the right against self-incrimination. Both systems also present individuals with the privilege to notice of the accusation or charge presented against them and finally, the prosecution party in both teams should prove beyond
…show more content…
For starters, the main aim of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate and reform the offender, thus the government applies methods such as probation, parole, and reform programs. The other system focuses more on punishment and separating the offenders from the public than on reforming them hence the use of incarceration. Imprisonment takes away the culprit’s freedom and subjects him or her to a rigid system of operation. They also aim at deterring the offender from re-committing the offence, and serving as a warning to other members of the public to avoid crime. Secondly, juveniles undergo adjudication instead of facing public trial by jury. Their trials involve a judge who hears the evidence then gives a ruling, while adults have the right to a public trial by the