Evidently, during the investigation process, there was a violation of Jack’s due process and constitutional rights. This is because the investigating officers did not assess Jack’s mental health. Additionally, the officers failed to establish whether the two minors were influenced and manipulated by an adult to carry out the crimes. Similarly, during the hearing process, his due process and constitutional rights were equally violated. This is because the hearing was organized in a very formal setting, which is the same manner adult offenders are often tried. Additionally, Jack was not given adequate time to look for a juvenile lawyer to handle the case on his behalf. On a further note, if I were Jack’s defense attorney, I would fault the prosecution team for failing to assess Jack’s mental health status before starting the prosecution. In addition to that, I would defend Jack by questioning why the prosecution team failed to establish the possibility of the presence of an adult who could have exploited Jack’s poor judgment as a teenager and manipulated him to commit the offense. However, if I were the prosecutor, I would point out the fact that Jack’s intention to commit the offense was very clear. The way Jack planned the whole crime, including how he manipulated Diane to hide the candy demonstrates Jack’s intension and capacity to commit the crime. Notably, the federal system could have handled Jack’s case differently. For instance, the Federal investigative officers could have assessed the mental status of Jack before deciding on whether to prosecute or note. Moreover, the Federal authorities could have established whether the Juveniles were influenced by other people to commit the offense. Consequently, house arrest would be the best court-ordered option to handle the case. This option would allow the parents or guardians to observe Jack’s behavior while also providing counseling to the juvenile.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
