Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MrsToneZone t1_j0ugjmb wrote

In 2017, my husband fought off a juvenile who tried to steal his car as he dropped our then 18-month old off at daycare. It was a coordinated effort, and happened at a nearby daycare one street over the day before. The assailant escaped into a waiting getaway car and was caught 48 hours later.

The officers responding said my spouse was lucky he didn’t hurt the kid, and the entire judicial process treated my spouse like the bad guy for fighting back against an experienced criminal (the assailant had recently been released from state custody). He ended up being charged as a juvenile because of “low IQ, slight stature, and history of cannabis abuse.” From experience, I’m willing to bet he’s either re-offended or re-incarcerated by now.

I don’t buy “stand your ground,” but I wish victims/potential victims didn’t have to worry about liability resulting from defense of person and property.

78

hogsucker t1_j0uv98x wrote

I would take any legal opinions of cops with a huge grain of salt.

Why wasn't the car thief charged as a juvenile simply because he was a juvenile?

59

MrsToneZone t1_j0uvnt0 wrote

Correct. The state’s attorney reinforced that to us.

And for some crimes, the accused is automatically charged as an adult. In those cases, the defendant is entitled to a waiver hearing in which they can be waived down to juvenile court which has implications for sentencing and criminal record.

In our case, the defendant was automatically charged as an adult. The magistrate provided those reasons for his decision to waive the accused down to juvenile court.

This ends up happening in most cases that involve a juvenile, short of 1st degree murder or cases in which the victim is a member of law enforcement.

Source: I worked in the juvenile justice system for a few years after this happened.

18

hogsucker t1_j0wodpl wrote

I look askance at adults who think it's okay to treat children as adults...As long as the adult really, really wants to. I wonder how the legislators who pass those kinds of laws feel about age of consent rules.

5

AllShadesObscura t1_j0vw34x wrote

Stature? If SYG was considered, your husband would be cleared by me. Proof of the baby nearby is all that’s needed. You also say it like the guy who attacked was over 18, but with a mild learning disability at least. Asperger’s is no longer a thing and we’ve had presidents with speech impediments. Paid damages and a restraining order from the fam and are of attempted robbery.

1

MrsToneZone t1_j0vxtf2 wrote

Yes. The judges need to consider if the defendant would physically be in danger in state custody. With gang dynamics, family vendettas, and the institutional setting, in general, every youth in detention is in physical danger more often than they’re not.

Size/stature is a factor that the judicial system has to consider because if they knowingly endanger a “child” by putting them in an environment where they couldn’t effectively defend themself, then some attorney would make a case about the state being liable if any harm did come to that “child” while he was in state custody.

The kid who attacked my husband was 16, and no, he was not too bright. His backpack, ID, and phone were left in my spouse’s car when he fled. He was smart enough to listen to his attorney and didn’t gain too much weight while locked up (common advice from attorneys in advance of a waiver hearing…”appear helpless/childlike”). His mother also attended with many of his siblings, which may have been compelling. I don’t think he had any physical/intellectual disability. Just a stupid kid who fell prey to environmental factors, and made a series of poor choices.

I was PISSED, and didn’t understand the juvenile justice system at that point. I’m not even sure if I do now, having experienced it through multiple lenses over multiple years. All I know is that no one is winning in the current model. Families, youth, and the community are all set up to continually be fucked and underserved.

6

AllShadesObscura t1_j0vym4k wrote

Reminds of the apparent car thief that took my mother’s gps but not her car when the keys were in it along with plenty of valuables. If he was 16, then it’s weird to first try him as an adult. Uh, could you at least recommend restraining order and maybe mandatory therapy / anger management or something like big brother?

2

Tahh t1_j0wwqai wrote

He ended up being charged as a juvenile because *he was a juvenile

0

MrsToneZone t1_j0x0o7c wrote

True. But having worked with incarcerated youth, I can tell you that their juvenile status essentially equates to a “get out of jail free” card for most of them. Literally. From their mouths, I’ve heard almost these exact words. I often wonder if a more serious consequence (including an attempt at ACTUAL treatment) would serve as a more effective response to the epidemic of youth-related violent crimes.

Of course, empowering families, invigorating education, providing employment support, redesigning the penal and juvenile justice systems, and improving access to free reproductive health care resources (including birth control and abortion) would be the actual solution to the problem.

5

[deleted] t1_j0x2wgu wrote

[deleted]

0

MrsToneZone t1_j0x59co wrote

Yes, but what to do with limited resources and infinite need? I worked with a juvenile who had been incarcerated ten times in the year before his most atrocious crime. He will serve life, likely in mental health treatment, which is warranted, but he’ll never be rehabilitated.

Obviously treatment is preferred to punishment, but based on my observations, there is ample evidence to prove that a purely restorative model is unrealistic, too.

3