- NEW!
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
by Elfie on August 21st, 2009
by sprky777 on August 22nd, 2009
by dancer on August 21st, 2009
by Anonymous on August 21st, 2009
by Macmedic and yet ... here I am on August 21st, 2009
by Anonymous on August 21st, 2009
by Sandy - Sand on August 21st, 2009
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
by Philip_H9732 on June 22nd, 2011
by Cory123456 on June 22nd, 2011
I was recent release from job for hitting the supervisor table with my fist. The company released me for workplace violence.
by Tadpol on April 6th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
can military deny who you date because their ex was abusive?
by blaze892 on April 10th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
is it legal for a almost 16 year old to have sex with a 17?
by kitkat16 on April 11th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
i am 16 and pregnant by my bf who jst turned 18 but i got pregnant before he turned 18 can he get in trouble if we are a yr.nd 2 month apart
by nettie_17 on March 27th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
Have you ever been detained or been blocked passage by someone not identifying themselves as security or law enforcement?
by -O-uknow on March 28th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
You're reading Ok if the law says your not an adult till your 18 then how are they getn away with throwing kids under 18 in prison or puting them away for life? theres a 16year old with the older men in prison as of today!
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
The Legislature creates the law and penalty structure
according to their perception of the will of the people they represent.
The Court interprets the law and delivers the sentence
according to the reasonable application of the law.
Under current law, it is true.
Therefore the Court considered the notion that the 16 year old
could be tried as an adult, and therefore get the sentence.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
Yes - on point, there is a mixed message about "calender age and moral maturity".
by Macmedic and yet ... here I am on August 21st, 2009
indeed.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
What is true under current law? Your rationalization does not defeat the non sequitur.
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
do you believe that only adults can be sentenced to life in prison ?
.
Can you show statute that defines the life penalty extends to those of less than age of majority ?
.
Elevating a child to adult court exists because the penalty in juvenile law does not include life.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
Can you show a statute that states the life penalty extends ONLY to those over the age of majority? You have to establish such a rule exits before you can claim someone is violating it.
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
the statute law defines the penalty for adult court.
For instance a child could not be charged for money laundering if there was no juvenile law to cover the charge, so he would have to be elevated to adult status.
.
YOU show where minors can be sentenced to adult penalties under the statute in question.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
And FYI: let me provide you with some insight as to why a child can only be tried as an adult if the legislature has allowed for it. A court’s jurisdiction is limited by the legislature. For example, in most, if not all, states a child is tried in juvenile court. A non-juvenile court does not have jurisdiction over a child unless the legislature gives that court jurisdiction.
...
Why not cite a statute that supports your view?
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
Because it was your non-sequitur statement that started this.
If you cannot support your own statement then withdraw.
Mine is the challenge;
yours is the proof.
show where the law in this case covers all ages.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
Not only am I a lawyer, but I used to be Court Appointed Special Advocate in juvenile court. I don't have to prove anything. I am merely pointing out for the general public that your question is based on false information.
...
And FYI: You cannot prove a negative in this case. In America everything is legal except that which is specifically made illegal. Thus, it is possible to prove that something is illegal by pointing to a statute, but you cannot prove something is legal because that is the default.
…
So how do you suggest I cite the absence of a statute? You can play these illogical games all you want, but that does not change the fact that your facts are just plain wrong. So if you want to have an intelligent discussion about your viewpoint, please provide a statute or accurate facts to support your premise. If not, go ahead and make some illogical rationalization (i.e. get the last word in as I am sure that will make you feel right), and move on with life.
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
7516577 wasn't my question, if you look again.
kudos on your qualifications.
plus you went off point yourself.
You are now talking about abscence of a statute when I was referring to abscence of a penalty in a statute.
You acutally agreed with my point in your previous point
" Let me provide you with some insight "
thats what I have been supporting all along.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
What I have been trying to get at
is the court elevates a child to adult status
so that the penalty could be more severe, as in adult.
the court would find a limitation on the penalty applied to a minor.
Elevating him to adult would remove the limitation.
by 000 on August 21st, 2009
That is not correct. I understand your view point, but it does not address actual criminal procedure. The legislature gives exclusive jurisdiction of criminal law as it relates to “juveniles” to the juvenile court. Thus, a regular trial court (called Superior Court in most states) does not have the authority to hear a criminal case involving a juvenile.
…
But note: “juvenile” does not necessary mean “minor” when it comes to jurisdiction. What qualifies as a “juvenile” is defined by the legislature. When a state allows a minor to be tried in a regular trial court, it does so by the legislature changing the definition of “juvenile” (i.e. changing the jurisdiction).
…
The decision as to whether or not a child will be tried as an adult is initially up to the prosecutor. If the prosecutor wants the child to be tried in a regular trial court (where the punishments are stricter), it does so by: (1) filing a motion with the juvenile court, and (2) provide facts as to how the minor qualifies for trial in a regular court via the rules provided by the legislature.
by OhLook - IamNoLongerAnonymous on August 21st, 2009
hmmmm +6
by Evil Pregnant Master on August 22nd, 2009
Thank you for clearing that up; I stand corrected, and appreciate your time putting me straight.
by 000 on August 24th, 2009
your welcoem
by Evil Pregnant Master on August 24th, 2009