And in Florida jury had gave a 14 year-old boy who killed a girl while playing wresting moves on her, and now will be life in prison without parole. (Jessica, Reaves that some consider 16-and 17- year-old for the death penalty). My second source was on a website huff post crime at (WWW.huffingtonpost.com) were their is a case that is written (By Paul Elias 08/18/12) were a young girl at age 17 from San Francisco she was sentenced to die in prison without parole. For killing and robbing and in that same city there was a murdered in 1993 by two teen did a robbery of gun shop. The San Francisco of California Assembly’s passage a bill introduced by state Sen. Leland yee, D-San Francisco.
Stanford v Kentucky was a United States Supreme court case that dealt with the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were at least sixteen years old at the time the crime was committed. Stanford was 17 years old at the time he committed murder in Kentucky. On January 17, 1981, Stanford and an accomplice repeatedly raped and sodomized twenty year old Barpel Poore during and after their robbery at the gas station Poore worked at. Hearings were held to decide on whether Stanford’s case should be held in Juvenile court or adult. The juvenile court did make the decision to transfer his case, therefore; Stanford would be trialed as an adult under a state statute permitting such action as to offenders who are either charged with a class A felony, capital crime or anyone over the age of sixteen and charged with a felony.
The subject was brought about by the case of Willie Francis, a 17-year-old convict in Louisiana who was sentenced to death in the electric chair after he was found guilty of murdering Andrew Thomas in 1944. Thomas was a druggist in St. Martinville, LA who had once been Francis’ employer. Francis was tried and convicted of first-degree murder, despite a confession that was illegally obtained, since Francis had not been informed of his right to counsel and didn’t have a parent or guardian present. On the day that Francis was supposed to be executed, the electric chair didn’t provide the needed volts to kill Francis, who instead moaned in agony as he was delivered a
While in these hardcore prisons, teenagers would be getting a criminal education instead of a real education. Politicians claim that they support policies that are tough on crime and prisons, but they're not. Instead of putting money into programs such as remedial education,
The Royal Commission reported back in 1981 and came to the conclusion that a better balance between bringing criminals to justice and protecting the innocent was needed. Many people believed that this report would lead to restrictions on police powers but when the POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 was passed it actually increased and consolidated the powers of the police to stop, arrest, search, detain and question suspects. In order to answer the criticisms raised about increasing police powers (when there was obvious evidence that these powers could be abused) Parliament explained that PACE 1984 had extended police powers as they need those powers to be able to do their job effectively but at the same time it imposes safeguards to protect the suspects from possible abuse. In fact the whole area of police powers is about the balance between the police’s need to be able to prevent and detect crime and thus the need to question members of the public and a citizen’s right to go about their lawful business without interference. Are you obliged to answer questions?
Unit 9: Final Project Joe Sloppner CJ140: Introduction to Constitutional Law Instructor: Irene H. Gainer, R.N., J.D. June 17, 2009 In the case Roper v. Simmons (03-633) 543 U.S. 551 (2005), is where a 17 year old, Simmons had planned and committed capital murder. After turning 18 years old, he then was tried and convicted with and imposed sentenced to death (Findlaw, 2009). Simmons filed a petition for state post conviction relief saying that under the Eighth Amendment, it is cruel and unusual punishment to execute juveniles. Under the Fourteenth Amendment, it prohibits the execution of mentally retarded people.
An opposing side would argue that this wouldn’t lead to less abuse. Well putting people in prison for it isn’t going to help either and if people are afraid of this drug they should also look at the binge drinking problem on many college campuses. “The pro-reform Drug Policy Alliance estimates that when you combine state and local spending on everything from drug-related arrests to prison, the total cost adds up to at least $51 billion per year” (Huffington post). The legalization will cause less spending on drug related issues and could be used for more important issues. I don’t believe this will be able to go through unless the general public understands how much spending is going into trying to get rid of this drug.
Now, I also agree with how if we make all drugs legal, then society would worsen. If we make drugs legal, then crime will decrease, but it means that drug use might increase as well. There will always be crime. You can't stop crime permanently. Although, drug-related crime might decrease and drug use will increase, if we just have criteria and enforce safe use of drugs, then society will have control of drug-use.
Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using lay magistrates in the criminal justice system With 95% of all criminal cases being tried at Magistrate courts (G Slapper, D Kelly, The English Legal System 11th Edition P424), one could say that they act as a filter for Crown courts. Every criminal case goes to a magistrate’s court first where a decision is made as to whether a case needs to be heard at a higher court. Magistrate courts are cheaper than Crown courts for several reasons. Firstly, the cases heard here are often less complex and take less time than those heard in a Crown court, consequently there is less need for expensive experts for such cases. The reason for this is because magistrates mainly deal with the more mundane cases such as petty theft and traffic violations.
Joel Rifkin is a serial killer who brutally murdered seventeen women. There was no abuse at home during his childhood, but he was constantly and brutally ridiculed and bullied by kids his age. His father committed suicide after a long battle with cancer and Rifkin’s murder spree began on the second