Criminal Court Model Vs. Juvenile Justice System

Words: 560
Pages: 3

The criminal court model is a more formal approach than the juvenile justice model. In the criminal court system, the purpose of sentences are to enact punishment proportionate to the offense; tends to limit discretion because determining the sentence by the crime produces fixed sentences. The juvenile justice model is relative to the offender, which can create discrepancies in sentencing, and the model believes in the process of rehabilitation for the defendant who are adolescents’ in this case. The crimes in juvenile court differ from those in criminal court; stemming from a belief that adolescents have a right to be treated differently than adults, due to the caliber of the crime, lack of awareness of the consequence, and development, and legal restrictions as minors.
The sequential justice model combines aspects of both models; the criminal court model occurs up to the sentencing, because the
…show more content…
Both sides have compelling arguments, but although I support the offender based consideration, I believe the criminal justice model should be imposed because the principle of government rests on equality before the law, and deeper inconsistencies of this fact are found in the juvenile justice model. In regard of varying sentences for (essentially) the same crime and two separate procedures for adolescents and adults; which can deny all the rights of due process, the juvenile system rests too heavily on opinion rather than fact. The brutal reality is the US legal system cannot possibly account for everyone, in the ideal world both models would produce uniform sentences, and rehabilitation would be successful in all situations. But America is too big and diverse to make judgments solely based on everyone’s personal state, and in some cases this principle eliminates the operation of legal law- to be independent from informal law that is based on the collective consciousness of societies to