urthermore, if our justice system uses mental incompetency as the reason juveniles have their own separate and more lenient court, why aren't 40 year-olds with the mind of a 10 year-old prosecuted in the juvenile justice system? Are they not mentally "immature" as well? An incorrect assumption about this controversial matter is if the juvenile were to be prosecuted in the adult court, he would be condemned with an adult sentence. The same goes for juvniles. If a 15 year-old were truly mentally immature, the adult justice system would take that fact into account of its decision and ruling. While others may argue that the juvenile justice system has the juvenile's best interests in mind, basic freedoms such as due process are denied in the juvenile courts. While those prosecuted in adult courts are entitled to a jury, juvenile sentences usually lay in the hands of an individual judge. The simple fact is that fully competent and mature juveniles are fully capable of committing the same crime as a competent adult. The results of the crime are the same. In burglary, an innocent person was robbed of his posessions. In murder, an innocent person was robbed of his life. As Katrina Ng, Santa Clara University freshman answered, "If they commit the adult crimes, they should pay the adult consequences. It's not as if they don't know the difference between right and wrong." And even in the extreme cases where right and wrong were indistinguishable to the immature juvenile, the adult justice system would be better equipped to prosecute him, allowing for mitigating circumstances and giving due process. This way, justice is best achieved--on both sides....
