Our Children and the Criminal Justice System” “Fairness and Equality” By: Brandon Harrington #248519

In June 2012 the United States Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to sentence a convicted juvenile murderer to a mandatory life without parole sentence.  See Miller v. Alabama 567 US _, 132 SCT2455; 183 (Ed2d 407 (2012).  In the Miller case 14 year old Evan Miller killed a man named Cole Cannon by beating him with a baseball bat after smoking marijuana and playing drinking games at Mr. Cannon’s trailer.  Mr. Cannon eventually passed out and Evan Miller attempted to steal the contents of Mr. Cannon’s wallet. While attempting to return the wallet Mr. Cannon awoke and grabbed fourteen year old Evan by the throat. A friend who was also present throughout the entirety of the evening hit Mr. Cannon with a bat. Evan Miller eventually grabbed the bat and repeatedly striked Mr. Cannon.  Mr. Cannon eventually died of smoke inhalation after Evan Miller and his friend set the trailer ablaze. Miller, 132 SCT at 2463

The United States Supreme Court considered these facts in conjunction with the law and determined that a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole was a direct violation of the 8^th Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment prohibition.  Miller 132 SCT at 2469.  The Court ruled that juveniles were different than adults and the mandatory life without parole sentence was the same for adults and children in name only.  Miller, 132, SCT at 2466, The Court determined that there existed a large amount of scientific evidence that supported the fact that children should be viewed as children and not treated as adults in the justice system.  Miller, 132 SCT at 2464-2465.  The Court also determined factors to be reviewed by Court’s in sentencing juvenile murderers such as individual character, criminal record, circumstances of offense, familial and peer pressure, age, background, mental emotional development, family life, incompetencies associated with youth that would affect a person’s ability to understand the justice system, aggravating mitigating circumstances, as well as culpability, and rehabilitation.  Miller, 132 SCT at 2468.  The court ultimately concluded that juveniles were entitled by law to a “meaningful opportunity to obtain release based upon demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.” Miller, 132 SCT at 2469

There are nearly 2, 500 children across the country currently incarcerated under these type of laws. More than the rest of the world combined.  There are two countries that allow for these types of sentences, the U.S. and Israel, M.Leigh-tont Ci de la Vega, Sentencing over Children to Die in Prison: Global Law and Practice 4 (2007).  Many of our children are what Justice Stephen Breyer considered to be people sentenced unconstitutionally despite the fact that they have “twice diminished” responsibility. Miller, 132 SCT 2475.  This is because as Justice Breyer explains, “…..[they] neither killed nor intended to kill the victims.

That leads us to the companion case of Miller also decided by the US Supreme Court resulting in the same direction; Kuntrell Jackson v. Arkansas.  Fourteen year old Kuntrell Jackson went with two other boys to rob a video store.  Along the way Kuntrell was made aware that one of the boys possessed a firearm.  While the other two boys went in to rob the store Kuntrell Jackson remained outside.  Laurie Troup was the store clerk at the time. Derrick Shields demanded money from Ms. Troup. Ms. Troup refused and threatened to call the police.  At this point Kuntrell entered the store and said either “I thought you all were playing” or “we ain’t playing”.  Derrick Shields then shot and killed Ms. Troup.  Miller, 132 SCT at 2461.

As a society we must determine whether we will automatically throw away all of these children’s futures or if we are willing to look at each case individually.  Usually the law demands individualized sentencing hearings for each convicted person the judge has discretion regarding sentencing.   If my child made one of these poor choices I would be devastated and even more so would the victim’s families.  There would be no way I could apologize enough, “fix” the tragic loss of a loved one, or heal the wounds created by my child’s horrific decision.  I could only hope that one day time would help them cope and that my son/daughter might also be given the opportunity to be rehabilitated. 

Throwing away children because they aren’t biologically ours and have committed a horrible act, shows that in some cases we judge our children as adults, regardless of the fact that they don’t have the same intellectual, emotional, or coping capabilities that we (adults) have developed.  We don’t let our children drive, marry, smoke, purchase alcohol, obtain loans, mortgages, or enter into any other contract without our permission or until they reach a certain age, but if the commit a crime we judge them as adults even as young as 11 or even 10 years old.  I don’t believe that this is the strong spirit of America or the compassion of a proud parent nation.  If we truly are a nation of equality, fairness, and second chances then this is a chance for us to demonstrate it.  We can email our local elected leaders and let them know how we feel about this or we can continue on with our lives because this situation doesn’t directly affect is.  This is not an attempt to guilt the reader into anything only an attempt to address a current problematic and clearly unfair situation.