Time is ticking.......
HR4300 RE-INTRODUCED AS HR 2289 JUVENILE JUSTICE ACCOUNTABILITY AND IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2009
TO ALL THOSE WHO WOULD END JUVENILE LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE,
Please join us, we need your help in this matter of life or death....... in prison!
Please be advised that HR4300 has been re-introduced as HR 2289 and titled Juvenile Justice Accountability and Improvement Act of 2009. This bill would effectively end juvenile life without parole in the entire
National Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Children
What is the problem that the National Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Children is trying to solve? There are more than 2,500 juvenile offenders in prison in the United States serving life without parole sentences for crimes they committed under the age of eighteen, and none in the rest of the world. Detailed research on the use of this sentence around the country has documented evidence of systemic racial disparities, gross failures in legal representation, and many examples of youth being sentenced more harshly than adults convicted of the same crimes. Why is JLWOP inappropriate for youth? The imposition of life without parole sentences on young people is especially cruel because children are different from adults, and juvenile justice is founded on the commonly-held belief that children, even those convicted of grave crimes, deserve the opportunity for second chances. Behavioral research confirms what is recognized by most U.S. and state laws: children do not have adult levels of judgment, impulse control, or ability to assess risks. There is widespread agreement among child development researchers that young people who commit crimes are more likely to reform their behavior and have a better chance at rehabilitation than adults. The Supreme Court agrees—in Roper v. Simmons the Court explained, Is JLWOP a violation of human rights? Yes. International human rights law prohibits life without parole sentences for those who commit their crimes before the age of 18, a prohibition that is universally applied outside of the United States. Children serving time in adult prisons are: 5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted Twice as likely to be beaten by staff 50% more likely to be beaten with a weapon 8 times more likely to commit suicide The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which only the United States and Somalia have refused to ratify, explicitly prohibits life without parole sentences. Additionally, JLWOP violates or drastically undermines at least three international treaties to which the United States is a party: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The international committees responsible for monitoring compliance with these treaties have criticized the United States for its continued use of JLWOP as a form of punishment. or contact
Despite popular thinking, a large portion of the people serving juvenile life without the possibility of parole (JLWOP) are not repeat offenders, nor have they been convicted of the most serious violent crimes.
Nearly 60% of people serving JLWOP are first time offenders. More than one quarter of people serving JLWOP were convicted of “felony murder,” which means they were participants in a crime that resulted in a murder, but did not actually commit it. The National Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Children is dedicated to seeking a just alternative to JLWOP that will hold juveniles accountable for their crimes while offering them the opportunity to earn their release before they die.
“From a moral standpoint it would be misguided to equate the failings of a minor with those of an adult, for a greater possibility exists that a minor’s character deficiencies will be reformed.”
Youth deserve meaningful and periodic reviews of their life sentences, to ensure that those who can prove they have reformed are given an opportunity to re-enter society as contributing citizens.
Isn’t JLWOP necessary to keep us safe? Every other country in the world has figured out a way to hold young people accountable for crimes without sentencing them to die in prison.
Young people in the United States deserve fair
treatment like those in the rest of the world.
Elimination of JLWOP does not mean that violent people will simply be
released to the streets. Instead, we recommend careful periodic reviews for youth who have been convicted of serious
offenses to determine if they continue to pose a threat to the community.
Does my state sentence youth to JLWOP? Commendably, 11 states either forbid JLWOP or presently have no such juvenile offenders that we know of serving that sentence.
The states that currently prohibit JLWOP are: Alaska,Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, New Mexico, and Oregon. The District of Columbia also forbids JLWOP.
The states where there are no people known to be serving JLWOP are: Maine, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Vermont, and West Virginia. The federal government also sentences youth to LWOP—there are currently at least 36 people serving JLWOP in federal prison.
What you can do to help: If you believe young people should receive a more appropriate sentence and the possibility of a second chance, please join the National Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Children. http://www.endjlwop.org/
As a member or supporter, you will receive continuing updates on the progress of legislation, and suggestions for action. If you want to become involved in this important effort, please contact Jody Kent, National Coordinator for the Fair Sentencing of Children: jkent@endjlwop.org
Catherine (Cat) Lambert
Alabama Coordinator for the Fair Sentencing of Children
919 Silver Mesa Dr.
Durango, CO 81301
lambert@mydurango.net
(970) 382-9089
Juvenile Transfer Laws: An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency?
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse/NCJRS This paper reports on studies that have examined the deterrent effect of juvenile transfer laws, i.e., laws that require the transfer of juveniles charged with specified crimes from processing in juvenile court to adult criminal court.
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States
OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, downloaded August 26, 2008.
The author concludes that the bulk of the empirical evidence suggests that transfer laws, as currently implemented, probably have little general deterrent effect on would-be juvenile offenders. Transfer laws have produced the unintended effect of increasing recidivism for juveniles who have been transferred, thereby promoting life-course criminality. Experts have identified several possible explanations for the higher recidivism rates of violent juvenile offenders tried in criminal court compared to those adjudicated in juvenile court. These include the stigmatization and other negative effects of labeling juveniles as convicted felons; the sense of resentment and injustice juveniles feel about being tried and punished as adults; the learning of criminal values and behavior while incarcerated with adult offenders; and the decreased focus on rehabilitation and family support in the adult system. A felony conviction also results in the loss of a number of civil rights and privileges, further reducing the opportunities for employment and community reintegration. These findings suggest that educating judges, prosecutors, court personnel, and legislators about the research on the ineffectiveness of transfer laws may reduce the number of cases transferred to criminal court or the number of transferred cases that result in criminal sanctions. The studies reviewed for this paper were recently funded by the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. In addition to discussing the research findings regarding the effectiveness of these laws in deterring serious juvenile crime, this paper also reviews the rationale and content of State juvenile transfer laws. 5 notes and 66 references
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=242419
