Fifteen people were found dead, and over twenty-three were left wounded. Two gunmen, part of the Trenchcoat Mafia, walked into their school at 11:30 am in Littleton, Colorado and started firing. Although this is not an everyday occurrence, juvenile delinquency has been a part of our history forever. People everywhere were shocked and afraid when the news broke out about Littleton, Colorado. People were afraid to send their children to school, in fear of what the day holds. Not only did this case surprise parents, family and friends of these boys; it also put a very hard case in front of the judge in court. Cases like these appear all the time, they just are not as publicized. Just because we, the public, do not hear about these cases everyday, does not mean that we should be uninformed of how our juvenile justice system is treating these cases and the problems that are evident. Many problems arise when it comes to different factors within the juvenile justice system. The main problem appears to be the lack of available alternatives to incarceration. Other problems also include discrimination that takes place in court due to lack of research, systems being too ready to send juveniles o

ver to the adult system and ignoring personality traits that form patterns, in order to better help the juveniles. Reformers have been making changes within the juvenile justice system in order to get the system working at its best. Despite reforms made to the juvenile justice system, changes are still needed.

A third reason why change is needed is because there needs to be more focus on keeping juveniles within the juvenile justice system, and out of the adult court system. Jeffrey Fagan et al., did a study for the ACLU and he concluded that children who are placed into the adult institutions are “500% more likely to be sexually assaulted, 200% more likely to be beaten by staff and 50% more likely to be attacked with a weapon than juveniles confined in a juvenile facility” (ACLU 2). PBS indicates that trying juveniles in actual criminal adult courts appears to result in higher rates of reoffending (Frontline 4). Cases are transferred to the adult court all the time, when in reality, juveniles would be better suited within their own justice system. Juveniles do not belong in adult courts for many different of reasons. There is no evidence showing that putting juveniles in adult courts really has any long lasting benefit for the child, and that is what the justice system is striving for- long lasting benefits. If a juvenile is put into an adult court, not only is there no guarantee of positive results but also it is unfair on the juvenile’s behalf. When a juvenile is tried in adult court, they cannot receive a fair hearing by a jury of their peers because their peers are not old enough to serve in a jury.

To fully understand the necessary changes needed, is it important to know the history of the juvenile justice system, along with a specific understanding of the word “juvenile”. The fact that there is a mistreatment of juvenile within the juvenile justice system is not something new, nor can it be blamed on the system “slacking off”. There are plenty of things that need to be taken into consideration when a youth gets into trouble and it is left up to the juvenile system to figure out the best way to punish him or her. In the eighteenth-century, the law did not distinguish any differences between juvenile crime and adult crime. The common law was that no child under the age of seven could be found guilty of a serious crime. It was not until the age of fourteen that they could be found guilty as long as they knew the difference between right and wrong. By the end of the nineteenth century, reformers created the juvenile court as possible means for rehabilitation. According to John Winterdyk, a Canadian author, nothing major was happening within the justice system until 1899. In 1899, Illinois stepped up and created the first statewide juvenile court. This court was created to deal with problems of neglect, dependency, and juvenile delinquency (Winterdyk 273). The mistreatment of juveniles was apparent by the time of the Progressive Movement. The ACLU claims that by the 1925, juvenile proceedings that were more focused on “prevention and rehabilitation rather than retribution and punishment” took place in nearly every state (ACLU 1). Webster’s Dictionary defines Juvenile as: “relating to youth or young people” (Juvenile 225). However, using the definition “youth or young people” does not draw a clear line for how far the word juvenile can be stretched. Few states use “juvenile” in reference to those under the age of sixteen. Jeffrey Butts and Adele Harrell, research authors for the Urban Institute, stated that there are thirty-seven states, including D.C., that use juvenile to explain youth under the age of eighteen. There are ten states that draw the line at sixteen, to be considered a juvenile, and three states that limit the juvenile age to fifteen (5). To be consistent with my research statistics and information, I am using the word “juvenile” in reference

Some topics in this essay:
Potter Howard, Colorado People, Jeffrey Fagan, Males Macalliar, Kurt Kumli, Urban Institute, Fondacaro Slobogin, Institute Justice, Greenwood RAND, According ACLU, justice system, boot camps, juvenile justice system, juvenile justice, adult court, boot camp, juvenile boot camps, juvenile boot, juvenile offenders, people believe, juvenile delinquency, potter howard, jenson potter howard, change juvenile justice, justice system system,