The juvenile justice system is an important division of the judiciary that listens to matters involving children. Such could range from offenses, runaways, neglect, and abuse of children. There are various offices involved, but the most immediate are the judge, the juvenile police officer, and the juvenile probation officer. These officers ensure that the objectives of these courts in punishing and rehabilitating juvenile offenders are achieved. This paper will highlight each of these three players' roles and decide the outcome in Charlie's case.
The judge has a variety of roles comprising administrative, advocacy, collaborative, and judicial functions. The judge, just like in all other cases, will listen to the issues, assess the facts, and make legal determinations (NCCD). A judge will decide whether a child should be punished and in what form, probation or restriction from returning home through detention in other settings such as jails or mental institutions (Cox et al., 2013). The judge will also ensure the juvenile offender and his family are told and clearly understand their rights and the case process. The judge also ensures that the court has sufficient resources and work staff to work efficiently and manage caseloads. Among other, probation officers, police officers, social investigators, and trained attorneys offer free services when needed. A judge also assesses and regulates the behavior of other individuals involved in the juvenile system to ensure they act fairly and legally that upholds the juveniles' rights and is geared towards the system's objectives. Judges also have a role in monitoring the child's progress after orders have been given and will keep in contact with probation officers and the child and his family long after the case was decided. A judge will implement, supervise, and enforce these functions to ensure due process is followed and adequate information supplied to the judge to enable a competent and considerate decision to be arrived at. Juvenile police officers are the first link between juveniles and the justice system (Cox et al., 2013). They take juveniles into custody and also arrest child offenders. They also mostly handle these cases informally at the police department using their discretion or formally through the juvenile courts. Collaboration with other institutions such as schools, mental institutions, and juvenile centers is critical in monitoring and adjusting youths' behaviors and influencing youth's perceptions of law enforcement (IACP Summit, 2014). This informal approach can take the various approaches; reprimand the juvenile, issue a ‘juvenile card’ to the police department or probation officer, and then release the juvenile and take the juvenile in custody to make a stationhouse adjustment. They also employ formal methods such as arresting the juvenile and referring cases to the judicial court through the state attorney. Police officers also investigate and report complaints and patterns of offense. The main role of Probation Officers is to enforce punishment or rehabilitative measures handed out to juveniles. Probation officers assess juvenile cases before they are officially referred to the juvenile court. They also investigate juveniles' details to submit a presentencing or predisposition report that guides the judge in delivering the sentence. They control and punish the offenders through enforcement of supervisory probation duties for first time and petty crime offenders (Chui, 2017). Such is keeping up with the need to protect society and to hold the youth offenders into account. They also serve a social service function where they use community programs, resources, and services to help in behavioral change among delinquents. They also guide, advise, and mentor offenders so that they can get rehabilitated successfully. They also play a resource broker role. Such is concerned with identifying needs among the offenders and then matching them with the right programs and services that fulfill those needs. Such indirectly addresses the causes of delinquent behaviors in some youths and, therefore, ultimately leads to rehabilitation. An example would be a probation officer who identifies youth with anger management issues and enrolls that youth in care and talk initiatives that address this problem. The Juvenile Justice System aims to hold child offenders into account for their misdeeds. The different stakeholders in this system play a crucial role in devising and implementing a course of action to address juveniles' offenses on a case to case basis. The merits of each case warrant the best rehabilitation method and inform the measures to be adopted. Restorative justice gives the offender space and the victim to interact and find a mutual settlement that eliminates further delinquent behavior (Restorative programs, 2018). However, when there is no mutual agreement between both parties, it bestows upon the Juvenile Justice System's key personnel to act in full capacity of the powers conferred upon them to remedy the offender's action(s). Both juvenile police officers and judges determine the consequences a juvenile offender faces, but the police deliberations are informal, while those of a judge are formal declarations. Both the juvenile probation and police officers will assess a case's strength before it can be formally submitted to the juvenile court. Police officers make informal deliberations of petty cases within their police departments. In contrast, probation officers screen cases formally submitted to the or the state attorneys by the police. Probation officers also investigate the child offender's background as police when referring a matter to a court. The police investigation aims to make a formal report for submitting the case to the state attorney. In contrast, the probation officers' investigation reports aim to determine the considerations the judge should use and the best sentence to be meted out. Therefore, due to the similarities and contrasts of the three officers' functions, collaborative efforts between them and the unity of the objective are needed to rehabilitate the offender in the best possible way.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Re Gault 1967 established four fundamental rights for juveniles charged with delinquency and these rights include; the right to be informed of the charges against the juvenile and sufficient time to prepare for the case, the right to be represented by a counsel, the right to engage with and cross-examine witnesses and the right to choose not to respond to the allegations as a defense strategy (silence). There are certain general rights available to adults that are not provided for juveniles. These include the right to a public trial and a trial by a jury of their peers. Officers are given the right to detain children they reasonably think they are runaways, those who exhibit delinquent or dangerous behaviors towards those around them, and those who require supervision. When detained temporarily, then there need not be an official arrest. The Uniform Juvenile Court Act contains these stipulations. Upon receiving the complaints against Charlie, the juvenile police officer will detain him. The officer should inform Charlie of his rights, especially that of maintaining silence and should in no way coerce him into the crime's admission. The officer will then make an effort to contact Charlie's parents and inform them of the events. Charlie is only 10 years old and should not remain in custody but released to his parents upon arrival at the shop or the police station. The officer should then record the charges, make a formal report, and institute a petition to the court. The judge will determine the next course of action. The judge will consider the past complaints of shoplifting by Charlie, the fact that it was his first charge at the juvenile court, and the value of the things he stole, making the offense a misdemeanor. A preliminary conference trial will be held, and Charlie should have legal counsel. An adjudicatory hearing will then ensue. The parties will be provided with the scheduled date and promptly informed to ensure their availability and preparation. The judge will then decide if Charlie's parents should pay restitution or if Charlie should be detained, receive rehabilitative sentences such as community service, or be placed under probation. The offense by Charlie was petty theft and, thus, a misdemeanor. Therefore, detaining him further would be a draconian measure. His young age also discourages that decision. However, Charlie needs to be monitored to ensure his shoplifting comes to an end due to the offense frequency. The judge would therefore place him on probation for a period of several months to one year. The Probation officer will then determine the terms and length of his probation. The probation officer will then relay his determination to Charlie and his parents. Charlie will make regular reports to the probation officer after a specified time frame of say three weeks or each month. The probation officer will monitor his behavior at school, at home, and in the community. The probation officer will also have constant meetings with Charlie’s parents and other grownups key to his development, such as teachers and religious leaders, to determine Charlie's behavioral changes and ensure rehabilitation evidence. If there is progress, Charlie may be released from his probation earlier than planned, but further violations may attract the probation period's extension, the institution of more stringent terms. Simultaneously, more grave and continued offenses may lead to more drastic measures such as another case or custodial sentence.
References
Chui, W. H. (2017). Probation for juveniles . Wiley Online Library. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118845387.wbeoc257
Cox, S. M., Allen, J. M., Hanser, R. D. & Conrad, J. J. (2013). Juvenile justice: A guide to theory, policy and practice (8 th eds.). Sage Publications Inc. Retrieved from: https://purdueuniversityglobal.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321950/cfi/6/6!/4/2/6@0:0
NCCD. (n.d.). The role of the juvenile court judge in child welfare . National Council on Crime & Delinquency. https://www.nccdglobal.org/newsroom/nccd-blog/role-juvenile-court-judge-child-welfare
IACP. (2014). Law enforcement's leadership role in juvenile justice reform . https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/2018-08/JuvenileJusticeSummitReport.pdf
Practice Profile: Restorative Justice Programs for Juveniles . (2018). CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice. https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/practicedetails?id=70
