In his book Just Mercy, author Brian Stevenson details many of the failures of justice that he has personally witnessed in his long career as a public interest attorney. Mr. Stephenson relays each case as a personal story. As a reader, I found myself sympathizing with many of the people Brian Stevenson worked to defend. I found myself shocked by how poor and underprivileged people were so often treated horribly coldheartedly by our justice system. Before I had believed our justice system to at least be fair and impartial. However, after reading Just Mercy, I believe the system to be very frequently biased and prejudicial. The story within Just Mercy that stood out to me the most, and perhaps made me the angriest, was the story of Charlie
…show more content…
After the nationwide spike in juvenile crime in the late 1980’s – early 1990’s (when Charlie’s case took place) that lead the states to adopt laws and policies that depraved certain youth of the original juvenile justice system protections, made it easier to move youth from juvenile to adult criminal court, and often placed children with the most severe sentences permitted by law, the McArthur foundation “led many states and courts to view juvenile crime, and juvenile justice, through a developmental lens”. (Juvenile) With recent research, in developmental psychology, on the still developing adolescent brain and how it differs from that of an adult. Because of this courts now often view rehabilitation as their primary goals. Thus often, instead of placing the youth in a juvenile jail, the juvenile is placed on probation, or in an educational and therapeutic program either provided in the youth’s community or in a residential …show more content…
and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Models for Change seeks to accelerate progress toward a more effective, fair, and developmentally sound juvenile justice system that holds young people accountable for their actions, provides for their rehabilitation, protects them from harm, increases their life chances, and manages the risk they pose to themselves and to the public” through targeted investments in “key states”. (MODELS) Though “Models for Change” success is slow going, they have multiple good “Keystones for Reform” put in place to help better the juvenile justice system. Three main keystones stick out to me the most: working toward a successful models in aftercare, improving and coordinating access to mental health services for youth in juvenile justice systems, and reducing disproportionate minority contact. This along with individual plans for each of their “key states” (starting to notice a trend with the word “key”), such as Illinois’s long term plan to “regain a position of juvenile justice leadership”, “Models for Change” has really mapped out their road to success with reforming the juvenile justice system. (MODELS) The state of Louisiana itself has made “significant strides in improving its juvenile justice system since the 1990s, and political leadership has shown interest in building on that progress”.
After the nationwide spike in juvenile crime in the late 1980’s – early 1990’s (when Charlie’s case took place) that lead the states to adopt laws and policies that depraved certain youth of the original juvenile justice system protections, made it easier to move youth from juvenile to adult criminal court, and often placed children with the most severe sentences permitted by law, the McArthur foundation “led many states and courts to view juvenile crime, and juvenile justice, through a developmental lens”. (Juvenile) With recent research, in developmental psychology, on the still developing adolescent brain and how it differs from that of an adult. Because of this courts now often view rehabilitation as their primary goals. Thus often, instead of placing the youth in a juvenile jail, the juvenile is placed on probation, or in an educational and therapeutic program either provided in the youth’s community or in a residential …show more content…
and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Models for Change seeks to accelerate progress toward a more effective, fair, and developmentally sound juvenile justice system that holds young people accountable for their actions, provides for their rehabilitation, protects them from harm, increases their life chances, and manages the risk they pose to themselves and to the public” through targeted investments in “key states”. (MODELS) Though “Models for Change” success is slow going, they have multiple good “Keystones for Reform” put in place to help better the juvenile justice system. Three main keystones stick out to me the most: working toward a successful models in aftercare, improving and coordinating access to mental health services for youth in juvenile justice systems, and reducing disproportionate minority contact. This along with individual plans for each of their “key states” (starting to notice a trend with the word “key”), such as Illinois’s long term plan to “regain a position of juvenile justice leadership”, “Models for Change” has really mapped out their road to success with reforming the juvenile justice system. (MODELS) The state of Louisiana itself has made “significant strides in improving its juvenile justice system since the 1990s, and political leadership has shown interest in building on that progress”.