Printer Friendly

Locked away forever: almost 10,000 Americans are serving life sentences for crimes they committed before they turned 18.

One night when she was just 15, Rebecca Falcon got drunk and made the decision that derailed her life. Now, she is serving a life sentence without parole at the Lowell Correctional Institution in Ocala, Fla. Looking back, Falcon faults her choice of friends. "I was like a magnet for the wrong crowd," she says.

At the time, Falcon was living with her grandmother in Panama City, Fla. On Nov. 19, 1997, upset over an ex-boyfriend, she downed a large amount of whiskey and hailed a cab with an 18-year-old friend. He had a gun and, within minutes, the cab driver was shot in the head. The driver, Richard Todd Phillips, 25, died several days later. Each of the teenagers later said the other had done the shooting.

Falcon's jury found her guilty of murder, though it never did sort out precisely what happened. "It broke my heart," says Steven Sharp, the jury's foreman. "As tough as it is, based on the crime, I think it's appropriate. It's terrible to put a 15-year-old behind bars forever."

The U.S. is one of the few countries that does that. About 9,700 American prisoners are serving life sentences for crimes they committed before age 18. More than a fifth have no chance for parole. Life without parole is available for juvenile criminals in about a dozen countries, but a recent report by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International found only 12 juveniles--in Israel, South Africa, and Tanzania--serving such sentences. In the U.S., more than 2,200 people are serving life without parole for crimes they committed before turning 18. More than 350 are 15 or younger.

CRUEL & UNUSUAL?

Juvenile criminals are serving life terms (with or without the possibility of parole) in at least 48 states, according to a survey by The New York Times, and their numbers have increased sharply in the past decade. Of those imprisoned in 2001, 95 percent were male and 55 percent were black.

Is such punishment fair for juvenile offenders? In March 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty for crimes committed by people under 18 violates the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments." That might have surprised the people who ratified the Amendment in 1791, many of whom found such executions neither cruel nor unusual. But the Court said that the meaning of the Amendment changes with "evolving standards of decency." Their decision has convinced prosecutors and activists that the next legal battleground in the U.S. will be over life sentences for juveniles.

'UNFORMED' PERSONALITIES

The Supreme Court ruled that youths under 18 who commit terrible crimes are less blameworthy than adults, at least for purposes of the death penalty: They are less mature, more susceptible to peer pressure, and their personalities are unformed. "Even a heinous crime committed by a juvenile," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy concluded, is not "evidence of irretrievably depraved character."

Most of those youthful qualities were evident in Falcon, who had trouble fitting in at school. She is in prison for felony murder, meaning she participated in a crime that led to a killing but was not proved to have killed anyone.

Jim Appleman, Falcon's prosecutor, says she does not ever deserve to be free. He is convinced that she shot Phillips. "If she were a 29-year-old or a 22-year-old," he says, "I have no doubt she would have gotten the death penalty."

Although Falcon believes her sentence is unfair, she says her eight years in prison have changed her. "A certain amount of time being incarcerated was what I needed," she says. "But the law I fell under is for people who have no hope of being rehabilitated, that are just career criminals and habitually break the law, and there's just no hope for them in society. I'm a completely different case."

'THIS CAN BE HARD'

The case of another Florida teenager, Timothy Kane, shows how youths can be sent away for life, even when they were not central figures in a crime. (Florida is among the states with the most juvenile offenders--about 600--serving life sentences, about 270 without parole.)

On Jan. 26, 1992, Kane, then 14, was playing video games at a friend's house in Hudson, Fla., while some older boys planned a burglary. That night, five youths rode their bikes over to a neighbor's home. Two backed out, but Kane followed Alvin Morton, 19, and Bobby Garner, 17, into the house. He did not want to be called a scaredy-cat, he recalls. "This is the decision that shaped my life since," says Kane.

He says he thought the house would be empty. But Madeline Weisser, 75, and her son, John Bowers, 55, were home. While Kane hid behind a dining-room table, Morton shot and killed Bowers. He then stabbed Weisser in the neck; Garner stepped on the knife, nearly decapitating her.

Morton was sentenced to death. Garner, like Kane, a juvenile offender, was given a life sentence with no possibility of parole for 50 years. Kane was also sentenced to life, but he will become eligible for parole after serving 25 years. He doubts that the parole board will ever let him out.

Kane grows emotional when talking about that January night. "I witnessed two people die," he says. "I regret that every day of my life, being any part of that and seeing that."

He does not dispute that he deserved punishment but says his sentence is harsh. His days at Sumter Correctional Institution in Bushnell, Fla., are spent in the prison print shop making 55 cents an hour. "You have no hope of getting out," Kane says. "You have no family. You have no moral support here. This can be hard."

WILL THE COURT INTERVENE?

In deciding whether "evolving standards" have turned against a particular punishment, the Supreme Court looks at what the states are doing. Life without parole for juvenile offenders is widely used, and only three states specifically ban it. If this form of punishment is to be banned by virtue of its violating the Eighth Amendment, it will likely happen only when a majority of the states first outlaw it.

Robert W. Attridge, the prosecutor in Kane's case, says he feels sorry for him. "But he had options," Attridge says. "He had a way out. The other boys decided to leave.

"Could Tim Kane be your kid, being in the wrong place at the wrong time?" the prosecutor asks. "I think he could. It takes one night of bad judgment and, man, your life can be ruined."

BACKGROUND

A jump in juvenile crime starting in the 1770s prompted a get-tough policy on teens. The 1974 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act allowed states to try juveniles as adults for some violent crimes. The resuLt: More than 2,000 people who committed crimes as teens are in prison with no hope of

BEFORE READING

* Write "Cruel and Unusual Punishments" on the board. Then have a student read the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution aloud

* Ask students to give their views of what might constitute cruel and unusually punishment.

ON TRIAL (ROLE-PLAY)

* Have students role-play people in either- the Rebecca Falcon or Timothy Kane case A "prosecutor" should offer reasons why Falcon or Kane are guilty of murder.

* The "defense attorney should explain why Falcon or Kane are not guilty of murder.

* Remaining members of the class--the "jury"--should individually explain why the age of either defendant should or should not be considered in sentencing

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

* Do you think tough sentences for juvenile offenders will help reduce juvenile crime?

* Should the justice system focus on punishment or rehabilitation for- teens who commit brutal crimes?

* Do you think people who accompany murderers but don't actually kill anyone should receive the same punishment?

WRITING PROMPT

Note the article's reference to peer pressure. Have students write a five-paragraph essay in which they define and explain the nature of peer pressure.

FAST FACTS

* Forty-one states currently dispense no parole sentences to offenders who committed their crimes when they were under 18.

* Pennsylvania has the greatest number of no-parole teen offenders in prison: 332.

WEB WATCH

www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org The U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, provides numerous links to sites discussing juvenile justice issues.

GRAPH NATIONAL

Young people sometimes commit terrible crimes, including murder. The question that prosecutors, judges, and juries must wrestle with is how to punish juvenile offenders. Does the severity of some crimes demand harsh punishment, no matter how old the person who commits them is? Many states have decided that when the crime is particuLarly heinous, the offenders--even teenagers-deserve life in prison without the chance of parole.

In Florida, for example, anyone aged 16 or older who commits murder is sentenced to mandatory life in prison without parole. In other states--North Dakota, for example--the sentence is discretionary, meaning the prosecutor or judge may weigh the circumstances of each offense on a case-by-case basis.

ANALYZE THE GRAPH

1. California has three times as many juvenile offenders serving life without parole as

(a) Va. (c) OkLa.

(b) Mass. (d) Colo.

2. Maryland, a state not shown on the graph, has half as many no-parole juvenile offenders in prison as South CaroLina. How many no-parole youthful offenders does Maryland have in prison?

(a) 20 (c) 13

(b) 9 (d) 17

3. Nevada has four times as many no-parole juvenile offenders in prison as Hawaii, another state not shown. How many juvenile offenders are imprisoned with no parole in Hawaii?

(a) 10 (c) 11

(b) 4 (d) 13

4. About how many more youthful offenders are serving no-parole sentences in Michigan than in Florida?

(a) 23 (c) 53

(b) 18 (d) 33

5. In 2005, there were 2,225 juvenile offenders serving Iife without parole in the United States. Approximately what percent of the total number of such prisoners did PennsyLvania account for?

(a) 15% (c) 20%

(b) 9% (d) 24%

6. If one governor commuted the sentences of 50 percent of his state's youthful, offenders who are serving Iife sentences with no chance for parole, there would still, be 90 such youthful offenders in prison in his state. Which state would that be?

(a) La. (c) Fla.

(b) Pa. (d) Calif.

1. [b] Mass.

2. [c] 13

3. [b] 4

4. [d] 33

5. [a] 15%

6. [d] Calif.

QUIZ 1 NATIONAL

1. What accounts for the fact that the United States no longer executes offenders who committed their crimes white they were under age 18?

a information about the pain of execution

b adherence to international taw

c a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling

d successful lawsuits by offenders' families

2. What does the article imply may have influenced Rebecca Falcon's crime?

a the speed of the cab

b the time of day

c Falcon's relationship with her friend.

d alcohol

3. The U.S. is one of four countries that jail juveniles without the chance of parole. The other three are South Africa, Tanzania, and

a Israel

b France

c China

d Germany

4. The article suggests a reason why the death penalty for teens, once acceptable, is not now. The change results from

a new and overwhelming public opinion that opposes the death penalty for offenders of any age.

b evolving standards of decency in the U.S.

c new laws in most states that prohibit the death penalty for young offenders.

d evidence that a small number of those who have been executed were later proved innocent.

5. Which of the following statements accurately describes the circumstances that culminated in Timothy Kane becoming involved in a gruesome murder?

a Kane was eager to participate in the robbery his friends were planning and felt it necessary to join in the murders after he saw that the owners were home.

b The other boys forced Kane to participate.

c Kane thought it was all a prank.

d Kane didn't want to be "scaredy-cat."

IN-DEPTH QUESTIONS

1. Some people argue that increasingly violent video games, as well as violence in movies and TV, help drive immature teens toward committing violent acts. Explain why you either agree or disagree with this view.

2. Should the law mandate no parole for those sentenced to life terms? Or should the circumstances of each case be taken into consideration when sentencing defendants? Explain your position.

1. [c] a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling

2. [d] alcohol

3. [a] Israel.

4. [b] evolving standards of decency.

5. [d] Kane didn't want to be a "scaredy-cat."

Adam Liptak is national legal correspondent for The New York Times; with additional reporting by Janet Roberts of The Times.
COPYRIGHT 2006 Scholastic, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2006, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:NATIONAL
Author:Liptak, Adam
Publication:New York Times Upfront
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 30, 2006
Words:2110
Previous Article:College lectures on the go.
Next Article:'This is not college'.
Topics:


Related Articles
Harsh punishment on Washington agenda.
The "three strikes policy" is an error.
Juvenile crime, grown up time.
Teen Court.
The Wrong Answer to Littleton.
They Killed for Kicks.
Should teens be tried as adults? Most states have made it easier to try teens as adults, but is it fair to hold them to adult standards? (opinion).

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters