Comparison Paper (Juvenile Justice/Adult Justice Systems)

Criminal offenders, both juvenile offenders, and adult offenders have to face the law.
These offenders are tried, and a verdict is reached on their innocence and guilt. However, due to
the nature of adult offenses, compared to juvenile offenses, there are two separate criminal
justice systems. However, in recent times, juvenile offenders are increasingly being tried in as
adults. If convicted, these juvenile offenders are being jailed in adult prisons. While the adult and
juvenile criminal justice systems could be different, there are certain fundamental principles that
characterize both systems.
One major difference between the juvenile criminal system and the adult criminal system
is the nature of the crimes. Adults are prosecuted for committing crimes, while the framing of the
charges in juvenile cases is committing delinquent acts. In certain cases, the delinquent acts
could be serious such as murder. To this end, the courts may decide that juvenile offenders
should be tried in the adult criminal system. Courts have expressed discretion on the matter. In
response to the juvenile crime that has been on the rise, the federal government, as well as state
legislatures, have made it easy to transfer juvenile offenders into the adult criminal system
(Redding, 2003). These laws are aimed at ensuring that the community is protected from juvenile
offenders who commit various crimes. Many of the people who have been transferred are
African American adult males.
Another difference relates to the use of juries in criminal processes. In adult criminal
processes, the accused persons have a right to a jury. If the cases proceed to trial, they are mainly
adjudicated by a jury. In contrast, juvenile offenders are not entitled to a jury. One judge is given
the obligation to fact-find during the trial (Farrington, Loeber, & Howell, 2012). The only
exception is bind over cases where there is a need to define whether or not the juvenile should

3
face charges in an adult criminal justice system. Juveniles are tried in an adjudication hearing
where the judge is presented with all the evidence, and they then make a ruling on whether or not
the juvenile is delinquent or not (Farrington, Loeber, & Howell, 2012). Should the court make
the conclusion that the juvenile is delinquent, then appropriate action is then taken. Bind overs
are made for serious crimes such as murder. The term used is adjudication or not adjudicated.
There are various similarities between the two systems. One similarity is the right to an
attorney. Both juvenile offenders and adult offenders are given the right to an attorney (Richards,
2011). The right to an attorney ensures that justice is administered and that the offenders are
heard in a just way. In addition, in both systems, the offenders have a right against self-
incrimination. The implication is that the offenders cannot be compelled to produce evidence that
incriminates them. In addition, the presumption of innocence is upheld in both systems
(Richards, 2011). The implication is that both adult offenders and juvenile offenders are treated
as innocent until court processes prove otherwise. Both adult offenders and juvenile delinquents
have a right to know the charges that have been preferred against them. Cross-examination of
witnesses is also available in both systems. The implication is that the charges must be proven
beyond any reasonable doubt.

4

References

Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R., & Howell, J. C. (2012). Young adult offenders: The need for more
effective legislative options and justice processing. Criminology & Public Policy, 11(4),
729-750.
Redding, R. E. (2003). The effects of adjudicating and sentencing juveniles as adults: Research
and policy implications. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1(2), 128-155.
Richards, K. (2011). What makes juvenile offenders different from adult offenders?. Trends and
issues in crime and criminal justice, (409), 1-8.