Are teen juries a good idea?

[AB Asks]

Preston is hosting the first ever youth jury (aged between 10 and 17) to pass judgement on a case in Britain. The idea is for the scheme to sit on cases of vandalism, bullying, graffiti or binge drinking involving young people. Do you think youth juries are a good idea? Will they be able to make reasoned decisions?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6990490.stm

[someguy0000]

Im assuming the jurors will be hand picked........and yes i think that there own kind should judge them, after all its giving all of them a bad name, it will teach them responsability and an ability to talk sensibly together about issues that effect all of them :)

[Reverandfunk]

Rubbish idea.

[China Doll]

I think it sounds like quite a reasonable plan actually.

[Booldawg]

'it will teach them responsibility and an ability to talk sensibly about issues that effect all of them' - isn't this what school and parents are for?

[someguy0000]

yes your right booldawg but sometimes 'extra curricular activities' i think can be a help.........although when i was at school E.C.A s were usually 10 tors etc........

[Gromit]

"that teenagers themselves thought young offenders would be more likely to be influenced by their peers."

We could also save an absolute fortune by ascking the Police and appointing Prefects instead.

[Shadow Man]

As if a ten year old could comprehend the socio-political decisions involved in restorative justice as opposed to individualist Benthamian punishment. Or the jurisprudent phenomological collective approach to natural law versus state imposed criminal santcions.

Hell, I don't even know what I am harping on about.

We don't need courts we need the reintroduction of stocks and the cat-o-nine-tails.

[netibiza]

I think the whole jury system is ridiculous on some cases. How can normal folk understand sub-dural haematomas! for example. Fair enough if someone has done a normal mugging or break-in but I feel it's way out of people's reach. Leave it to a panel of judges as we do here in Spain.

[vehelpfulguy]

I think in general in this country we do not give enough responsibility to young people.

My father left school at 14 and went out to work.

I am currently reading a book about the second world war and it mentions boys as young as 15 joining the navy and army and going off to fight.

A few years ago I was in the USA and went to a American Football Match (NFL).

Being the USA there were all sorts of shops inside the stadium, and almost all of them were manned by teenagers (roughly 16 to 18 years old). All the "old" people were in the crowd.

Any shop in a football stadium in the UK would probably be "manned" by loads of old women in their 60s.

Maybe we need a massive campaign to encourage kids to take a more active role in society instead of us all ignoring them. This leaves them to stand on street corners with nothing to do.

Serving on juries would be a good start.

[New Judge]

I don�t often become involved in matters of opinion on AB, but in this case I�ll make an exception.

Whether or not the principle is right or wrong is nowhere near as important as the practicalities of this proposal.

Judging an issue (especially one as important as alleged crime and proposed penalties) is not straightforward. Ask any judge or magistrate and they will tell you that almost every case they deal with is different and requires a different, individual solution. Anybody that has served on a jury is also likely to say that the task is quite onerous and not to be undertaken lightly.

The proposal suggests that children as young as ten should exercise judgement over their peers. I would be surprised if there are any children of that age that could come to a properly structured decision on the sort of matters they are likely to have put before them. At age ten children are only just deemed capable of criminal intent. Younger than that and there is a blanket assumption that, whatever they are said to have done (up to and including murder), they were not old enough to know that it was wrong.

For children aged 10 to 17 the criminal justice system has specific constraints which are designed to recognise that the young people brought before the courts must be treated differently because of their age.

This proposal suggests that people of that same age group are suddenly mature enough to be able to pass judgement on important matters and I would suggest that this is simply not true.

Of course the rule of law (and hence the penalties handed down by the courts) can only be sustained by consensus. The principle of �judgement by one�s peers� is worthy, but it has its limitations (otherwise only burglars would judge burglars).

I�m afraid this is another badly thought out scheme which, hopefully, will be exposed as a non-starter before it progresses too far.

[Gromit]

Apparently, they are not allowed to serve ASBO notices on wrongdoers, but they can dispense Chineese Burns with willynilly.

[naomi24]

I wonder if they'll be impressed and see the culprits as role models. Oops! Could be a big mistake!

[anotheoldgit]

Why not let them sit on juries, we have a load of kids sitting on benches in the House of Commons.

[phil87015]

Its a good idea in a sense, but if the P.C.brigade Hadnt banned smacking and shami shami shami, wouldnt have invoked the human rights act for children, then these chav's would be punished properly and fairly. I actually live in Preston Lancashire.