A Question of Freedom: Initial Thoughts

The book A Question of Freedom is written by a man named R. Dwayne Betts. I chose to read this book for my second semester Issues in Modern America class. Mr. Betts was only sixteen years old when it only took thirty minutes to change his life forever. Mr. Betts writes "thirty minutes changed my life. It took less thank thirty minutes for me to find the sleeping man in his car, it took less than thirty minutes for me to get to jail" (7). At age sixteen Mr. Betts was with a friend at a mall in Springfield, Virgina when they found a man sleeping in his car. At that time he pulled out a pistol and tried to take the mans car. He committed six felonies in thirty minutes. At age sixteen Mr. Betts was thrown in jail to await his sentence. Upon his time waiting in jail he met a boy named Chi. Chi was only fifteen years old at the time and was being charged as an adult for attempted murder. He told Mr. Betts that he was not guilty. Chi had gotten in a fight at school. A fight at school leads to an attempted murder charge. Mr. Betts writes "Judges learned to read our complexions, crimes, and communities as reasons why we needed the bars of a jail. And anyone telling me that isn't true should take a look at the shades of brown I watched walk in and out of the system. Couldn't tell me then this wasn't true, when I'd seen one white child locked up in three months. Chi told me he wasn't guilty, and I told him it probably didn't matter" (16-17).
The introduction to Mr. Betts story was not surprising to me, but it was still disturbing. In particular Chi's story. A school fight, which happens at my own school, leading to an attempted murder charge? If Chi was charged with assault as a juvenile that I would understand, he could still get an education, take courses on anger management, and pay his debt to society. I believe when young offenders are charged with exaggerated crimes and are put into an adult prison it is going to really hurt them in the future, except Mr. Betts is different. The judge gave him a nine year sentence. This lead Mr. Betts to get out of prison around the age of twenty-five. The human male brain does not fully develop until the age of twenty-five, so that is nine years of Mr. Betts' young life that was developed in prison. Now I believe that Mr. Betts is different because when he came out of jail, we went on to do something different unlike the majority of inmates released each year, which end up back in the prison system. Mr. Betts went on to write this book, A Question of Freedom. In this book he reflects on his time in prison and his crime that he committed. That thirty minutes it took to change his life forever.

Juvenile Offenders Tried in an Adult World

In America we take our amendments in our Constitution very seriously, especially the first ten. The first ten amendments provide us with essential rights and freedoms as well as protects us from being taken advantage of by the justice system of government. If you are being taken to trail for a crime, you have the right to a trail by jury. The jury consists of twelve members with diverse religions, ethnicity's, and gender. The jury are a selection of the defendants peers. Peers. In order to serve jury duty, you must be at least eighteen years old, you must legally be an adult. This means that juveniles who are tried as adults, yet are not adults have a jury of adults, not their peers. I came across an interesting article titled "A Jury of Their Peers". In this article it talks about a method of punishment called peer court. Peer court is a new branch of court. It is a court made for juveniles who commit small offences. In peer court the members of the jury, judge, and lawyers are all peers. They are all under the age of nineteen. According the article "sentences are generally creative forms of community service, never jail time, and the records show that 99% of those sentenced complete their tasks. Doing so keeps their criminal records clean, which helps their college and job applications". I believe the most important part of this system is that it is a jury of their peers.
Although this system would not be reasonable for any serious juvenile offenders, how about Anthony Laster. In my previous blog I told the story about Anthony Laster and his school yard dispute made him face fourteen days in jail and the possibility of up to seven years in an adult prison. Peer court seems like it would have been the better option for Anthony. In peer court his own peers would have been able to think in the same way that Anthony might have at the time of the "crime". I believe providing real peers for juvenile offenders would make the justice system more fair to juveniles. A thirty-four year old man cannot think the same way that a young offender would, but a seventeen year old teenager would have a more realistic insight. Now, this does not mean that a sixteen year old who commits car jacking with a deadly weapon should go home and with some fines and community service, but is it fair to take away a person's life and replace it with the misery of jail for one mistake?


http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=107&sid=01408fa0-ac33-4f7a-8f1e-fe5b61b90dc3%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=tth&AN=17575039

Juvenile Justice Research

Anthony Laster was only fifteen years old when he was charged as an adult for crimes that he did not understand. He was facing "strong armed robbery and extortion" and sat in jail for four weeks because his family could not afford his bail. His crime? He stole two dollars from another kid from his school. Anthony cannot communicate more than the level of a five year old. Although Anthony's charges were dropped that does not remove the trauma that he faced. There is a fine line between giving consequences to juveniles who commit crime and ruining their entire life. Let's say that the charges against Anthony had not been dropped, then what? According to Florida Department for Corrections the average jail time for a robbery conviction in the year 1997 is 6.9 years. That is almost seven years of hard time that Anthony Laster would have served. He would have come out roughly around twenty two years old, all for stealing two dollars. Let us consider Anthony Laster to be lucky. Laster is an excellent example of the justice system being too hard on juveniles.
Now let's look at the case of Ronnie Vera. Washington Monthly posts "He and a friend were caught stealing a bike in a neighborhood by a prominent community activist in Tuscon. Ronnie turned to run. His friend pulled out a gun and shot and killed the community activist. One year later, a jury convicted both Ronnie and his friend of murder." Ronnie was only sixteen years old at the time. He is now serving a twenty-five to life sentence in an adult prison. Ronnie was charged with first degree murder and burglary in the first degree. Ronnie is in no doubt guilty of theft, but murder? No. This is yet another example of the justice system being too tough on juveniles.
Cracking down on juvenile crime does not work as a deterrent. It does not work because adult prisons are too harsh. The adult prison system does not correct inmates. Juveniles who go into adult prisons at a young age and come out in their midlife will struggle with finding a job, not violating their parole, and adjusting to life in the real world. Howard Husock, the vice president for policy research for The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research said "About 700,000 inmates are released from state and federal prison each year. Of those released, about two-thirds re-offend within three years." While I do not believes that the crimes that juveniles commit should be taken lightly, a mistake a person made as a kid should not ruin their whole future. The two-thirds of the inmates who are released then return, return with a reason, but for those who are juveniles at the time of their incarceration were not taught any better. The human male brain is not fully developed until the age of twenty-five, so a young man who is incarcerated let's say at the age of seventeen will still be developing mentally for eight years in prison. Eight years. What they have learned and developed in those eight years sets them up to be re-incarcerated.


http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2001042700&type=hitlist&num=0
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/1999/9906.twohey.littleton.htm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35263313/ns/business-careers/