Investigating The Age Of Criminal Responsibility

Investigating The Age Of Criminal ResponsibilityThe side by side(p) inquiry attempts to enquiry and discuss the venomous season of proper(a) in England and Wales. A questionnaire was given out to a adjudicate creation in auberge to gauge common opinion on and almost this topic. Secondary breeding was ga in that respectd, such as books, journals and online resources, in order to discuss and explore assorted slipway of dealing with teen epoch parters. Overall, the evidence indicates a strong inclination for the be on of nefarious indebtedness to be rhytidectomyd scarce substandard evidence was ga in that locationd to specialize gain groundly which juvenile justice an exna is about effective.The suppurate of shepherds crook responsibility is the succession at which a child can be considered an adult for purposes of cruel prosecution. In England and Wales, the criminal shape up of responsibility is forget me drug at develop ten-spot and is matchless of the lowest in Europe, with only if Switzerland being lower at age seven. Countries such as Uganda, Algeria, China and the Russian Federation, all use up political regimes that could arguably be considered as severe and excessive, yet, all these countries turn in set the criminal age of responsibility at everywhere ten classs, YJB online.In England and Wales the age of criminal responsibility has non changed since 1963, when it was elevated from age eighter from Decatur to ten. Until 1988 a policy was in place to safe guard children in the midst of the ages of ten and fourteen to a lower place this policy children were presumed incapable of course of studying necessary criminal intent unless proven otherwise by the prosecution, House of Commons depository library online. In March of this year, Scotland brocaded the age of criminal responsibility from age eight to twelve years England and Wales have no plans to change the age at present. YJB online. on that pointfore, e vidence shows that there is no clear agreement on what is an acceptable age to be treated as an adult under the legal power of the law.Literature reviewMorrison, Blake. (1997). As If. London Granta Publications.Blake Morrison attended the essay of Jon V modifys and Robert Thompson and in his book gives a sensitive account of the families involved in the Bulger lesson. Morrison describes a criminal justice brass that is concerned with only facts and arguably lacks the understanding needed when dealing with such sensitive cases involving children of such a young age.Williams, John. (2010) ASBO Nation. Sociology Review. 19, (4), p2-6.Sociology Review is an schoolman magazine aimed at A-level sociology students. It c everywheres a unsubtle range of sociological topics including politics, education, and religion and of course discourtesy and deviance. In this payoff of the magazine it covered a topic on anti mixer behaviour orders, which proved utilizable when discussing juvenil e abhorrence.Children Young People straight online Available fromhttp//www.cypnow.co.uk/Archive/1009000/Criminal-Bar-Association-chair-calls-rise-age-criminal-responsibility/ get ated 19th June 2010Children and Young People Now is a Journal available in print and on line. It aims to bring together children and young professionals across health, social c ar, education, childcare, juvenility sue and youth justice, to house advice and guidance to managers and senior practitioners functional with children and young people. It features m twain relevant discussion articles and current issues concerning children and young people and is a trusted source of information used by professionals working within this area.The Howard league for penal Reform. online Frances Crooks blog (updated 1st April 2010) Available from http//www.howardleague.org/francescrookblog/the-age-of-criminal-responsibility accessed Saturday 19th June 2010Frances Crook is the director of the Howard League for penal Reform, the oldest penal reform charity in the U.K. She has been obligated for research programmes and campaigns to raise public concern, about among other things, young people in trouble. passim her career she has worked as a teacher in secondary schools as well as taking the position of Governor of Greenwich University. In 2005 she was awarded the Perrie plunder which is awarded to individuals who have made a substantial contri simplyion to the development of criminal justice or penal policy and practice. because, Crooks broad career working with children and within the criminal justice constitution gives her valuable insight into the most effective ways of dealing with child plague.Youth Justice Board. online Cross-national equality of youth justice Available from http//www.yjb.gov.uk/en-gb/ accessed Saturday 19th June 2010The youth justice instrument panel (YJB), oversees the youth justice outline in England and Wales. It works to prevent anger by children and young people under the age of 18 and ensures that chains for them is safe, secure, and addresses the causes of their dishonouring behaviour. It enables access to reports and legislations and is a valuable and reliable resource concerning youth crime.Home office online Available from http//www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/ accessed 1st July 2010The home office is a Government department that deals with, among other things, drugs, policy, police and crime. During this research it proved useful as a guide to the workings of the criminal justice arranging in England and Wales. It is also tie in to galore(postnominal) surveys and statistics that were used within this research. world an official Government department, the information is highly reliable.RationaleThe media is awash with reports of juvenile crime with stories of anti-social behaviour to to a greater extent violent crimes such as the slay carried out by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, Blake Morrison, (As If). In 1998 the Anti Social Behaviour swan was introduced, and since then the term asbo child has become part of the English language, Sociology review, vol 19, (p2-6). grinder and knife crimes are high and recent reports claim that the ambulance and emergency service in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, dealt with six hundred and seventy nine gunshot wounds in people under the age of twenty five in the twelve months leading to October 2009, BBC Newsbeat online. thence, the criminal age of responsibility is often the snap of lots discussion. In light of the recent reports of Jon Venables being taken top into custody Guardian.Co.uk online, the Childrens Commissioner Maggie Atkinson reportly called for the government to raise the age of criminal responsibility, from age twelve to fourteen, Children and Young People Now online. This cause is supported by the Chairman of The Criminal Bar association, Paul Mendelle QC, who is reported as verbalise that he also believes that the a ge of criminal responsibility should be raised to age fourteen he is also reported as job for a return to the previous policy of Doli Incapax. However the Ministry of Justice maintains that children over the age of ten sleep together the difference between unstable way and serious legal injurydoing, Children and young people now online. Therefore, evidence shows a lack of agreement concerning the set age of criminal responsibility. Consequently, it could be argued that the current dodging would benefit from research to attention determine a to a greater extent universally acceptable age to be held criminally responsibility.AimsThe aims of this research areTo explore different ways of dealing with young offenders in England and Wales, to help determine ways that could improve the current system.To discuss whether age ten is a reasonable age for children to be held criminally prudent for their actions, within the jurisdiction of the law.To measure public opinion on whether the criminal age of responsibility should be changed in England and Wales.The experimental Hypothesis and null HypothesisA majority of the public in England and Wales sprightliness that the criminal age of responsibility should be set higher than age ten.This research predicts that the majority depart feel that the age of criminal responsibility should be raised and hence it is a one-tailed hypothesis.Under the null hypothesis we would expect no clear majority to be revealed on either side of the argument.MethodAn exposed questionnaire was used to gather qualitative, old data (appendix A) eighteen participants were chosen from change demographic coveringgrounds to help give a effectual representation of the big population, of England and Wales. Their ages ranged from eighteen to seventy four and consisted of both males and females and both parents and non-parent. The participants were verbally briefed on the nature of the topic and the questionnaire had a brief written introduc tion explaining the elemental history and facts of the yield. They were told that all answers would be regarded as anonymous and that they had the right to delineate their answers if they so wished. Using an open questionnaire enabled the respondents to be guided through the local questions whilst steady having the flexibility to amply express their feelings on the topic. Also, space was provided for every further comments the participants wished to make. After the interview participants were asked to sign a consent form giving their permission for the information to be used in sociological research (appendix B).ResultsOut of eighteen respondents, just under half(prenominal) mat that the age of criminal responsibility should be set higher than age ten. Just over half of the respondents felt that children of age ten do non fully understand the consequences of their actions. When asked should to a greater extent responsibility be move upon the parents of young offenders, all but one respondent felt that it should, and then supporting the idea that the current system in England and Wales does not work sufficiently. Contradictory to this evidence, when asked, do you feel that the current system works sufficiently, only dickens thirds of the respondents felt that it did not many respondents felt that they did not know enough about the current system to give a logical reply. When asked for their ideas on improving the current system, respondents answers were varied and included much stop at home, stronger punishment for parents and more involvement from relevant bodies i.e. well-being workers and so forthTherefore the questionnaire supports the original aims of the investigation. It was useful in gauging public opinion on whether the criminal age of responsibility should be changed and it enabled the respondents to express their opinions on whether age ten is a reasonable age for children to be held criminally responsible for their actions. Lastly i t gave space for respondents to give any ideas they had concerning the improvement of the current systemDiscussionOverall the research indicates that there is a strong argument for raising the criminal age of responsibility this is supported by both primary and secondary data. some people feel that children of age ten do not fully understand the consequences of their actions. Also, evidence indicates that there is a strong feeling amongst the public that more responsibility should be rigid upon parents when asked, all but one respondent agreed that parents should take more responsibility for their childrens behaviour. Lastly, the primary data from this research indicates that many people feel that the current juvenile justice system does not work sufficiently in England and Wales.The results from the questionnaire support existing evidence for example there is much evidence to support a change in the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales. One such argument was put f orrard by the childrens commissioner Maggie Atkinson who when referring to the murder of James Bulger (James was murdered by two ten year old boys in 1993, Morrison, As If) is reported as precept Venables and Thompson should not have been tried for murder, at age ten they were to a fault young to understand the full consequences of their actions Guardian online. Frances Crook, the Director of The Howard League for Penal Reform also supports Atkinson argument and compares the legal system of England and Wales with that of other countries in Europe. In her blog, Crook points out that the criminal age of responsibility in England and Wales is one of the youngest in Europe and she goes on to argue that children in these countries are not ignored if they do wrong but instead their immatureness is recognized and the response is appropriate, Frances Crooks Blog online. This argument is also supported by the chairman of the criminal bar association, Paul Mendelle, who called for the age to be raised from age ten tofourteen. In an interview in the Telegraph Mendelle is reported as saying, a child of ten can know he or she is doing something wrong and not always appreciate it is criminally wrong children and young people now online. In his book As If, Blake Morrison once again supports this attitude and suggests that children of ten are not able to act on their understanding of right and wrong with the same conviction as adults he goes on to argue that, if children of ten know the difference between right and wrong then why not let them be jurors? (As If, chapter 5).Although there is much support for the criminal age of responsibility to be raised, it has been refused by the Ministry of Justice, which maintains that children of age ten and over can differentiate between bad behavior and serious wrong doing, Children and Young People Now online. Many people have similar opinions as the primary data of this research illustrates, just under half of the respondents felt that age ten is a reasonable age to be held criminally responsible for your actions. Other than public opinion, there is little evidence of a similar attitude many high profile and academic people agree that age ten is not an appropriate age but other than the Ministry of Justice, no academic opinion was put together to support the other side of this argument.Research illustrates two main attitudes towards dealing with young offenders the wellbeing approach and the justice approach. The welfare approach emphasises paternalism and protection and therefore focuses on treating the root causes of juvenile crime whereas the justice approach emphasises judicial rights, accountability for crimes and formal punishment, Cross-national comparison of youth justice online. It could be argued that most criminal justice systems can be traced back to either the welfare or justice approach but most are more varied and complex and include elements of both. match to the Home Office Youth Lifestyl e Survey (1998/99) online, key factors linked with serious and/or persistent offenders between the ages of twelve and seventeen was found to beDrugs children that had used drugs within a twelve month catamenia were almost fives times more likely to offend than those that had not.School children that were joyless in school or were persistent truants were found to be more likely to offend.Family and peers children that had family and friends who had offended were found to be more likely to offend themselves.Also children that did not have sufficient supervision and guidance, and /or hung around in public places, were found to be more likely to offend than those that did not.Additional research into the reasons why children offend is beneficial to crime legal community agencies in addressing and preventing juvenile crime. Much research supports the idea that prevention is the cheapest and most successful way of dealing with crime studies in America have shown that one dollar spen t on early prevention go forth save seven dollars fourteen years later, young people and crime online. Therefore, the root causes of youth crime are of great interest to Sociologists and Governments alike.The following paragraphs aim to explore and compare two similar criminal cases, so as to determine ways that could improve the current system in England and Wales. The first crime took place in 1993 in Merseyside, England. Two year old James Bulger was taken from a shopping centre by two ten year old boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. Venables and Thompson wandered around with James for several(prenominal) hours out front beating him and leaving him tied to a railway handle when the child was finally found his body had been cut in half by a passing train. The two boys, Venables and Thompson were tried and convicted of murder in an adult court which in contrast to youth courts allows public and media access and consequently spent eight years in custody before being release d in 2001 with protected identitys, Morrison, As if. In 2010 Venables was taken back into custody but the reason has not been made clear to the public. There has been no news on Thompson and so it may be assumed that he has colonised back into mainstream society with no major problems.A similar crime was committed in 1994, in the Norwegian city of Tronheim. Five year old Silje Raedergard was stoned and left to freeze to closing in snow, by two six year old boys, BBC News, How Norway dealt with its Bulger case online. In contrast to the Bulger killing, the two boys responsible for killing Silje were not prosecuted or named in the press but instead were treated as victims, not killers. The boys were left with their families and returned to kindergarten shortly after the incident and welfare and psychological help was given to them. All that is known of the two boys today is that one has settled back into mainstream society and the other still has ongoing psychiatric problems.There fore it could be argued that while these two cases were dealt with very differently, the outcomes are similar. One of the boys responsible for Siljes death has adjusted to normal life but the other still receives psychiatric help. Likewise, Venables has been returned to custody but Thompson so far has not. Little more is published about the boys or families concerned in these cases, which leaves many questions un-answered concerning the long term effects of both methods of reform. Statistics show (appendix C) that the annual total crime rate in 2002, in the U.K. is over 6.5 million compared to Norway which is just over 330,000 this could arguably be an indication that the juvenile justice system in Norway is more efficient than of that in England and Wales, The Eighth United Nations Survey online.Limitations of the methodological analysisKeeping the focus of this research simple proved difficult because the subject of criminal responsibility is extremely vast. Finding Government rep orts and statistics that were specifically think to the topic was also difficult and time consuming. Also, gathering a sample that is representative of the wider population is challenging when time and resources are limited. Therefore the primary data gathered in this research was arguably limited and a larger population sample may have given more valid results. Not all of the questionnaires were returned and some people felt that they did not know enough about the topic to make valid comments. Therefore a more in-depth introduction or briefing may have been beneficial. Possibly a focus group would have been a more useful method of gathering primary data as it would of enabled the participants to fully discuss their ideas and thoughts on the subject before deciding on any conclusions.In conclusion, the evidence gathered in this research supports the hypothesis there is much evidence both primary and secondary that suggests that the criminal age of responsibility should be set hig her than age ten. Different ways of dealing with juvenile crime was explored and statistics were gathered to help determine which system proves to be most sufficient. Arguably, lower crime rates in Norway indicates that the welfare approach which is the most dominant factor in the Norwegian system is more effective than the justice approach, that is more dominant in England and Wales but as the comparison of criminal cases show, any difference is minimal and not sufficient to make any bold conclusions.RecommendationsIf further research were to be carried out, I would recommend thatMore time is taken to investigate other juvenile justice systems, such as that of Norway.A larger population sample would be useful to gauge a more valid public opinion.A focus group would be useful to enable participants to discuss and answer any queries they have.