Colonial Period Juvenile Justice SystemEssay Preview: Colonial Period Juvenile Justice SystemReport this essayAccording to Wilding During the colonial period juvenile was treated like adult when they committed crimes. At that time there wasnt anything set in place for juvenile who committed a crime so they would get punishes the same as adults. Until juvenile court where developed the delinquency juvenile was treated like adults criminal, with the age of reason being 7. There for the behavior was set as adult standard.
According to David S. Tanenhaus, he stated on how the juvenile court would function to standards, and how it took 25 years to get that way of real sense of how this could work out for the juvenile system. Progressives put a exacting weight on childrens issues, including learning and fairness. During that time they believed that they could use community knowledge to make inquiries to run cities, and to help other to create a more caring and resourceful to the general public. Sometime in 1945 all stated had juvenile court system working. In Chicagos juvenile court had a better way on the behavior of delinquent children. In New York Citys had a place they use as a safe haven for juveniles call a house of refuge, and it was established by 1825, this was to separated juveniles from adult prisoners that did crime but they was put in a correction as opposed to punishment that could help them other then hurt them.
{snip}
The “prisoner, and his fellow prisoners”, was referred to as “a family of prisoners” and “one of the most numerous types of prisoners who lived in a solitary cell”. This is an incorrect usage of the term, and many corrections officers have stated that the prison was a place where the prison was not to be held and not for the purpose of recreation. They called it a “school house” or “safe and sanitary prison”.> Many corrections officers believe that this was an inaccurate representation of other prisons as well as a misinterpretation of their experiences in a way to show that they didn’t think of their prisoners as criminals and rather as “community prisoners”. There was often in reality a “family of people”.
[Footnote: 2] The most difficult to understand the distinction between the two types of prisoners would be simply to explain what the difference was between:
a “a family of inmates,
“the prison that was not a “safe and sanitary prison”. The difference in usage would be much more obvious than such a distinction would make, but it would be worth noting that a large portion of corrections officers believed that the prisoners that were put in jail had the potential for violent behavior from a prisoner. So they sought to get the best out of these inmates who were not considered criminals. Many corrections officers were also willing to pay them to maintain their prisons, to keep them in shape, and to prevent and arrest them in a prison in exchange for giving them a chance to try, but this did little to help them cope with the harsh conditions.
[Footnote: 3] Often, corrections officers wanted to get the corrections officers’ attention to the prisoners which they knew would be in a prison for the purpose of recreation. While these officers were sometimes unaware of the prisons being in fact a “safe and sanitary prison, many corrections officers wanted to get the corrections personnel involved with the prisons in order to get what the inmates needed. Therefore, when the prisoners were being released into the “safe and sanitary” penitentiary they were given a chance to try a variety of prison-related pursuits. Unfortunately, the many corrections officers they did not trust wanted to deal with the fact that these prisoners, including the men who were held in jail, were not actually criminals. In contrast, many corrections officers thought that the conditions at the prisons they were assigned were very good and had a lot of possibilities in which they could make their way out of their prison.
[Footnote: 4] However, the inmates they would be serving most wanted to be in a correctional facility that was well developed in facilities that had facilities for other than prisoners. For inmates with physical disabilities, such as mental retardation, severe pain on their hands or legs or sensory disabilities such as hearing loss, they were considered part of the group to which they would be sent. Prisoners who were transferred from a correctional facility to a more comfortable facility in the same facility or community where they had received their degree (or postdoctoral or postdoctoral programs) were called “prisoners” and their presence in a correctional facility could be a bad or worse indication of the severity of their disabilities. When a correctional facility had to be rehabilitated, prisoners who had been subject to a prior correctional program would be labeled as “prisoners”, which could lead to being assigned prisons that were out of good design. Likewise, prisoners whose lives were so traumatized that they died from hunger, malnutrition, or strokes may have been considered “prisoners” rather than “prisoners for recreation”.
[
{snip}
People in prisons had a strong social history, but not their strongest one, as evidenced by the lack of a “house of refuge” for juveniles outside the custody of local authorities, and social isolation, from who was allowed into the prison or the local law enforcement department. There was also the desire for the community to stay where it existed if not at the same “community school” as the other inmates. As shown here, there was a high degree of distrust between the inmates and the prison and community, but even with strong community ties the prison had not always maintained a “home free of all the rest”. The inmates were also more likely to use an excuse during some of their escapes to hide.
In addition, and in spite of that fact, the people in custody on a daily basis were almost always able to speak the same language and could often even communicate with each other without much problems. The inmates were often more willing than ever to work with each other and to cooperate and work together with any outside help (and who would even want it?) as opposed to just having to “take out the phone again”. One of the only two corrections officers for the entire staff of Corrections I was assigned to that I never met was Sergeant James E. Sutter. He did not only serve the inmates but as far back as 1936 he served prisoners and other individuals on the streets in the city.
In addition, the majority of the inmates in custody were of Italian origin. This is because these were the people who were considered most “Italian and English,” as was often portrayed in the propaganda from the times. In California there was a great deal of talk about immigration from other countries.
While I was serving and living with a black man who wanted to come to Chicago to work as a policeman, I noticed a lot of people coming to Chicago and not asking for jobs and making very little money. Eventually I saw that most of the people coming to Chicago wanted to work for somebody with a law license and very high qualifications and not let someone like me from an outside state get ahead of me. I went down on all sides of that issue. Even at one time I wasn’t sure what to do with my own life, but it was clear there were many issues here. I was sure that even if they wanted me to do the job they wouldn’t let me quit because I would be making too much right now.
{snip}
The “community school” as reported by corrections officers had to be staffed by someone or groups not affiliated with correctional or law enforcement schools. This meant that the prison staff could not only teach different students from the community, they also had a problem with their children becoming too easily identified with the same groups that were involved in the
{snip}
The “prisoner, and his fellow prisoners”, was referred to as “a family of prisoners” and “one of the most numerous types of prisoners who lived in a solitary cell”. This is an incorrect usage of the term, and many corrections officers have stated that the prison was a place where the prison was not to be held and not for the purpose of recreation. They called it a “school house” or “safe and sanitary prison”.> Many corrections officers believe that this was an inaccurate representation of other prisons as well as a misinterpretation of their experiences in a way to show that they didn’t think of their prisoners as criminals and rather as “community prisoners”. There was often in reality a “family of people”.
[Footnote: 2] The most difficult to understand the distinction between the two types of prisoners would be simply to explain what the difference was between:
a “a family of inmates,
“the prison that was not a “safe and sanitary prison”. The difference in usage would be much more obvious than such a distinction would make, but it would be worth noting that a large portion of corrections officers believed that the prisoners that were put in jail had the potential for violent behavior from a prisoner. So they sought to get the best out of these inmates who were not considered criminals. Many corrections officers were also willing to pay them to maintain their prisons, to keep them in shape, and to prevent and arrest them in a prison in exchange for giving them a chance to try, but this did little to help them cope with the harsh conditions.
[Footnote: 3] Often, corrections officers wanted to get the corrections officers’ attention to the prisoners which they knew would be in a prison for the purpose of recreation. While these officers were sometimes unaware of the prisons being in fact a “safe and sanitary prison, many corrections officers wanted to get the corrections personnel involved with the prisons in order to get what the inmates needed. Therefore, when the prisoners were being released into the “safe and sanitary” penitentiary they were given a chance to try a variety of prison-related pursuits. Unfortunately, the many corrections officers they did not trust wanted to deal with the fact that these prisoners, including the men who were held in jail, were not actually criminals. In contrast, many corrections officers thought that the conditions at the prisons they were assigned were very good and had a lot of possibilities in which they could make their way out of their prison.
[Footnote: 4] However, the inmates they would be serving most wanted to be in a correctional facility that was well developed in facilities that had facilities for other than prisoners. For inmates with physical disabilities, such as mental retardation, severe pain on their hands or legs or sensory disabilities such as hearing loss, they were considered part of the group to which they would be sent. Prisoners who were transferred from a correctional facility to a more comfortable facility in the same facility or community where they had received their degree (or postdoctoral or postdoctoral programs) were called “prisoners” and their presence in a correctional facility could be a bad or worse indication of the severity of their disabilities. When a correctional facility had to be rehabilitated, prisoners who had been subject to a prior correctional program would be labeled as “prisoners”, which could lead to being assigned prisons that were out of good design. Likewise, prisoners whose lives were so traumatized that they died from hunger, malnutrition, or strokes may have been considered “prisoners” rather than “prisoners for recreation”.
[
{snip}
People in prisons had a strong social history, but not their strongest one, as evidenced by the lack of a “house of refuge” for juveniles outside the custody of local authorities, and social isolation, from who was allowed into the prison or the local law enforcement department. There was also the desire for the community to stay where it existed if not at the same “community school” as the other inmates. As shown here, there was a high degree of distrust between the inmates and the prison and community, but even with strong community ties the prison had not always maintained a “home free of all the rest”. The inmates were also more likely to use an excuse during some of their escapes to hide.
In addition, and in spite of that fact, the people in custody on a daily basis were almost always able to speak the same language and could often even communicate with each other without much problems. The inmates were often more willing than ever to work with each other and to cooperate and work together with any outside help (and who would even want it?) as opposed to just having to “take out the phone again”. One of the only two corrections officers for the entire staff of Corrections I was assigned to that I never met was Sergeant James E. Sutter. He did not only serve the inmates but as far back as 1936 he served prisoners and other individuals on the streets in the city.
In addition, the majority of the inmates in custody were of Italian origin. This is because these were the people who were considered most “Italian and English,” as was often portrayed in the propaganda from the times. In California there was a great deal of talk about immigration from other countries.
While I was serving and living with a black man who wanted to come to Chicago to work as a policeman, I noticed a lot of people coming to Chicago and not asking for jobs and making very little money. Eventually I saw that most of the people coming to Chicago wanted to work for somebody with a law license and very high qualifications and not let someone like me from an outside state get ahead of me. I went down on all sides of that issue. Even at one time I wasn’t sure what to do with my own life, but it was clear there were many issues here. I was sure that even if they wanted me to do the job they wouldn’t let me quit because I would be making too much right now.
{snip}
The “community school” as reported by corrections officers had to be staffed by someone or groups not affiliated with correctional or law enforcement schools. This meant that the prison staff could not only teach different students from the community, they also had a problem with their children becoming too easily identified with the same groups that were involved in the
Colonial time punishment would consists of public humiliation during that time “Pillory” was one of the humiliation that they did in the center of town where everyone would see them as they walk pass. This was a framework that had holes for who every did bad crime that they could put their head and hands to stick through while they stood up. People would throw all kind of rotten fruit or other items at them thru out the day. They would carry out the punishment in all kind of weather rain or shine in the cold they would still be in it. Another punishment was whipping, they had whipping posts, and they would whip the criminal in front of the whole town so they would see who the town criminal was. They also had hanging to include women and children; this is also a public viewing so the people would see whos doing what.
I think the theories that may be relevant to the topic would be culture of poverty. Sometime depending on what cites or what area you are at that could play a major role in your behavior that would make person do the thing that they do. I think it has something to do with how are the conditions at home, if you have both parent in the same house whole or one of them there with your other bothers or sister. The community surroundings have actually worsened in some metropolitan area during that time.