Sunday, September 15, 2019
Police work with juveniles Essay
Introduction            This term paper tackles the issue of police work with juveniles. For purposes of this paper therefore, juvenile delinquency should be understood to refer to any antisocial or criminal behaviour by children or adolescents (Quint, Andrew Reisig & Mueller, 1996)            On Friday June 1996, a 9 year old and 11 year old boy were charged with the rape of an 8 year old pregnant. In addition, a pregnant girl was shot by another student in St. Louis Miami almost during that time (emergency net news, 1996). These are just but cases of Juvenile offences that the police have to deal with.            Juvenile policing has its roots in 1899 in cook county Illinois, where the first court was created as a result of ideological changes in the cultural conception and strategies of social control during the 19the century; an event that culminated into a century long process of differentiating youths from adults offenders( Quint et al. 1996)            What then is the police role in juvenile policing? Just like the adult system of criminal justice, the juvenile justice system also has three basic components, the police, courts and corrections (Larry & Welsh, 2004) More often than not, whether or not a juvenile is processed into this system is dependent upon the outcome of an encounter with the police. It is therefore true to say that, the police serve the role of the gatekeepers to the juvenile justice system. They thus begin the criminal justice system. Also, upon the arrest of a juvenile offender, the law provides for the police to release the juvenile to his or her parents or take the offender to a court (Quint et al. 1996) A new view has however emerged within the police themselves. Rather than seeing themselves as crime fighters who track down serious criminals or stop armed robberies in progress, many police departments have adopted the concept that their role be maintaining order and being a visible and accessible component of the society(Larry & Welsh, 2004)            Police research and other related studies indicate that these offender of violent juvenile crimes are likely to turn up to world be junior terrorists who can be of rivaled some of the worst terrorist organizations in the world.(Quint et al 1996)            The arrest procedures for juvenile offender differ from place to place but generally, arrest becomes the primary option of securing the juvenile’s attendance to court. In addition, a written notice can be issued by police for the offender to appear in court (Larry & Welsh, 2004). This is however mostly given to minor offenders. The investigating officer then notices the parent or guardian about the arrest of the time, date and place where the offender is to appear. While doing this, the police are supposed to exercise discretion to enhance the child’s rights and divert the child away from the mainstream criminal justice system(Larry & Welsh, 2004)            Search and seizure is another method of police methods of investigation. The law governing search and seizure is typically the same for both adults and juveniles (Larry & Welsh, 2004). This procedure involves among others photographing, fingerprinting, lineups and record keeping. Children however, just like adults are also protected against unreasonable search and seizure under the fourth and fourteenth amendments of the constitution (Larry & Welsh, 2004)            There is also custodial interrogation which requires the offenders  to be questioned often within the presence of their parents or attorney. This is because any incriminating statement arising from such custodial interrogation can be used at trial (Quint et al. 1996)            Because of the informality that has been built into the system in an attempt to individualize justice, much discretion needs to be exercised. Daily procedures of juvenile personnel are rarely subject to judicial review except when they violate the youth’s constitutional rights (Larry & Welsh, 2004) and as a result, discretion sometimes deteriorates into discrimination and other abuses on the part of the police.  Too little discretion gives insufficient flexibility to treat juvenile offenders as individuals while too much leads to injustice (Larry & Welsh, 2004).  Police for instance are likely to act formally with African American suspects and use their discretion to benefit whites (Larry & Welsh, 2004). Other factors include environmental factors whereby the police have that in born mentality within them that certain places, or if a child comes form a particular place, then he/she is likely to be an offender. This stereotypy thus falls under the environmental factors.            Police bias can also be as a result of the situation and conditions under which the child is arrested. If the child brings complications such as putting up a resistance against the arrest and therefore fights the officer, or merely has a bad or negative attitude, then he is likely to be arrested in such a case discretionary justice is likely to take place (Larry & Welsh, 2004). It should be noted also that discretionary decisions are made without guidelines from the police administration. As noted earlier, there are many factors that influence the decisions made by the police about juvenile offenders. among the ones not mentioned include, the seriousness of the offense, the harm inflicted on the victim and the likelihood that the juvenile will break the law again (Larry & Welsh, 2004).            The police have however taken the lead in delinquency prevention by employing a number of strategic measures some of which rely on their different powers. Others have relied on schools, the community and other juvenile justice agencies (Quint et al, 1996).            One of these strategies of contemporary prevention relies on aggressive patrolling at specific patterns of delinquency. This is what we refer to as aggressive law enforcement. The police here target gang areas and arrest members for any violations. The tactic however has not proved to be effective since in most cases, the results tend to be unsatisfactory (Larry & Welsh, 2004).            In 1996 for example, the Dallas police initiated the strategy, which led to significant reduction in gang activity, targeting truancy and curfew laws but the saturation patrols proved ineffective (Larry & Welsh, 2004).            Police have also worked with schools to improve their safety and prevent delinquency in the community through organizations of various programs (Quint et al. 1996). The problem here however lies in the view that is held by some people over police in schools. These people assert that this infringement on the personal freedoms of students (Larry & Welsh, 2004)  and that schools  should be left to run sovereignly. There are also others who call for greater use of police in schools, especially those schools that have experienced violent incidents in the past by students against teachers (Larry & Welsh, 2004).            Community policing may also be employed here. Community policing models are put in place aimed at improving relationships between the community and the police. This will be important since many juveniles will then have a high regard for the police. Conclusion The ever-changing nature of juvenile delinquency thus calls for more experimentation and innovation in policing strategies inorder to prevent delinquency (Larry & Welsh, 2004). Among the first steps therefore should be tailoring policing activities to prevailing local conditions and providing for an enlargement in the community and other stakeholders   References Emergency Net News Service, 1996 http://www.emergency.com/juvycrim.htm Larry J. Siegel, Brandon C. Welsh (2004). Juvenile Delinquency. Belmont, Calif: Thomas Wadsworth Quint Thurman, Andrew Giacomazzi, Michael Reisig and David Mueller (1996). Community based Gang Prevention and Intervention: An Evaluation of the Neutral Zone: Crime and Delinquency
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.