Tag: criminal law

Youth Offenders – Dangerous Children?

Posted on by T. Maxwell-Harrison

What would you say to a child who had stolen some money from your purse? What if they apologised and you decided to show remorse? Think about this, what would you do if that same child, exactly a week later, was arrested and charged with causing grievous bodily harm because they smashed a glass bottle over another childs head?

Youth offenders, also called young people, young offenders, are rampant in the United Kingdom. In fact, the UK has the highest rate of youth offenders across Europe. (https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/sep/22/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation) Although the article is from 2008, what does it tell us? Charity Barnados stated in that “custodial sentences are ineffective because 78 per cent of 10 to 14 year olds reoffend within 12 months of release”. Quite a significant figure. If you look at what is available to youth offenders, or children, you will see that the criminal justice system or youth court system powers vary widely when dealing with children.

Before going any further, it would aid if you understood exactly what a child is in the eyes of the law. The age of criminal responsibility is from 10 years old. This may bring up mixed emotions when you read it, as surely that is too high, or surely, is too low? Under 10 and you cannot be arrested and charged with a crime, a rather frightening thing though isn’t it? (https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/youth-crime). Some suggestions out there state that people are born good or bad, and if that is true, and a child is bad and commits a heinous crime, like murder at 8 years old… that leaves open a massive hole, which will likely be filled by media misinformation. Young persons therefore, are from 10 to 17 year old. Actually, its 14 and under at which they are classed as children, at the point they committed the offence. 18 onwards is classed as an adult by the law of England and Wales. However, it gets complicated with the 18 year olds. If sentenced to prison, they will enter an establishment called a young offenders institution that holds 18-25 year olds. To read more about the sentencing guidelines of youths read the following (https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/overarching-guides/magistrates-court/item/sentencing-children-and-young-people/).

“…that leaves open a massive hole, which will likely be filled by media misinformation.“

 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act (YJCEA) 1999 introduced safeguards for children which would allow youth court to operate completely differently to the normal courts. The youth court would not be as formal as a crown court. Counsel would not be wearing wigs or gowns and the child will be addressed by their first name, to help put them at ease. There is no public in the court and the identity of the child is to be kept hidden to protect them, although the press is allowed into the youth court. Usually there would be a parent or guardian required if the youth is 16 or under. There would be someone there from the youth offending team (https://www.gov.uk/youth-offending-team) if appropriate along with a court officer. The court will deal with offences such as theft and drug offences, (https://www.gov.uk/courts/youth-courts). More serious crimes like rape or murder, also called grave crimes, will be sent to the crown court.

There has been an overall decrease in young offenders and child offenders ( (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-justice-statistics-2020-to-2021/youth-justice-statistics-2020-to-2021-accessible-version), however, what the statistics show is that a lot of the crimes committed are predominantly by males.

Young persons committing these crimes seems to be an integral part of society, it drags it down and doesn’t look promising for the future of our country when the children are turning to the dark side of crime. Take a look at the following post by the Crown Prosecution Service – https://www.cps.gov.uk/wessex/news/59-year-old-man-stabbed-and-beaten-teenagers. Both defendants were young offenders at the time of the offence, Clarke being 17 and his unnamed accomplice 15. Upon sentencing, at which point Clarke turned 18, he was stripped of the protection of the youth courts in terms of keeping his identity hidden. His accomplice must have been 16 and thus, they cannot name him. This change in age is significant and it will impact the sentence they received. It was a heinous crime involving stabbing a 59 year old man. Clarke received a sentence of 3 years detention in the young offender institution as has been touched on above. Notice also, that he was sentenced in the crown court. This is because of a few factors, most notable is that he is receiving a sentence above two years. The youth court cannot deal with him due to his age. The youth court can only impose a maximum of a 2 year detention and training order, Section 34A Children and Young Persons Act 1933. (https://yjlc.uk/resources/legal-terms-z/youth-court#:~:text=The%20maximum%20sentence%20in%20the%20youth%20court%20is,Section%2034A%20Children%20and%20Young%20Persons%20Act%201933). Reviewing this 3 year sentence, it does seem appropriate, given his age, given the nature of the offence and his plea. Had he been sentenced under 18, he may have received a detention and training order from the youth court at a lesser rate.

Moving to Clarke’s accomplice, who pleaded guilty to battery and criminal damage at Southampton Youth Court in June 2020. He received a 12 month referral order and must pay £50 compensation to the victim. Being I presume 16 at the time of sentence means he is still within the definition of a young offender. He received a referral order, meaning that he was pleading guilty and would have likely been his first offence. A referral order “must be imposed on any youth with no previous convictions who pleads guilty to any imprisonable offence, unless the court is considering an absolute discharge, conditional discharge, Mental Health Act order or custody” (https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/pronouncement-cards/card/referral-order/). The justice system determined that 12 month referral order with a fine was sufficient. Due to the complex nature of the various possibilities with youth offenders, it will not be possible to cover all of it here.

There is more to young offenders and children being convicted of crimes. There appears much scope for the issues to be tackled before the crimes are committed. Perhaps targeted towards the rampant availability of dangerous weapons which are easy to get hold of. Or, perhaps the inadequate or uncaring parenting that is resulting in damaged children seeking some sort of justice for the way they feel? Is the crimes being committed by children due to a lack of education or empathy? Maybe a lack of human contact or support, drug use, housing issues, family issues… the possibilities are endless. This articles suggest some of those reason – https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/preventing-involvement-crime. Parents are not invisible to the court system though, and should they find their children involved in crime, may be given a parenting order. Such arises where a child doesn’t attend school or commits a criminnal offence (https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/explanatory-material/magistrates-court/item/ancillary-orders/19-parenting-orders/). (https://www.edgehill.ac.uk/law/research/criminology-research/parenting-orders-criminalisation-parenting/).

Ultimately, what someone does or does not do can come down to a range of varying factors, some of which may never come to light, due to embarrassment, such as mentally ill children who have been abused, or those who come from broken homes, or lower income families. It isn’t about blaming anyone though. We can’t resolve an issue by ignoring possible solutions whilst pointing the finger. Youth offending teams and the multiple charities supporting young offenders is incredible. Support is there to give them the rehabilitation they need and possibly more. It is easy to judge someone if they have a child who is convicted, but how would that affect you? Do you see beyond the newspapers and the mostly rhetorical nonsense that the news tells us about the real reasons for young people committing crimes? Do you better understand the legal definition of children and the possible sentences available, so when you see stories purportedly suggesting a 15 year old ‘should have got 10 years’… what will you say?

This has been an article on children and young offenders.

Controversial Cases in the Media

Posted on by T. Maxwell-Harrison

Hi there, how are you? Good. How am I? I am doing well, relaxing in my white waffle tracksuit drinking cold tea.

As an aspiring barrister who has little under a month until I begin the bar course, I find myself drawn more and more into the controversial criminal cases that have found there ways into the media. Most media is skewed, but still there is an element of truth to the stories.

Prologue:

There will be a case in the paper concerning a ‘horrific’ and ‘brutal’ criminal offence that has left victims either ‘severely injured’ or ‘dead’. There is no shortage of these types of cases. What sort get put into the paper and why? Cases you read about in the paper are cases like these;

The cases show a cross section of the same types of people within our society. The bottom case is of interest today, and I’ll tell you why. It’s of interest because the article has unequivocally highlighted yet again the failures of both the social support system and the criminal justice system in general. The policing system, the government and the courts should be held accountable for the amount of crime that is committed on a daily basis, of which there is A LOT. Why does the media keep reporting these cases, instead of lobbying for increased funding to the severely underfunded legal system? Why aren’t the government acting concerned?

Main story:

The last case, concerning a teenage mother who left her baby to ‘starve’ to death as she went and partied for a little under 6 days, jailed for 9 years. (Ignore that 69).

Quoting the article; “Asiah died at the flat and tests showed she was starved, dehydrated and had developed flu. Judge Christine Laing said the final days of her life are “unbearable to contemplate” as she sentenced Kudi.”

Below is a picture of the defendant, found guilty of manslaughter. She had previously pleaded guilty. Did you know that a guilty plea automatically knocks a 1/3 off your sentence? Did you know that criminals can get out of jail early for ‘good’ behaviour? Did you know the the convicted are released before serving even half of their sentence dependent on when the judge sets the earliest parole date?

Screengrab taken from mobile phone footage of Verphy Kudi at a concert in Elephant and Castle London. (PA Images)
A screengrab taken from mobile phone footage of Verphy Kudi at a concert in Elephant and Castle, London. (PA)

“She herself, the defendant, is both very young and we would submit very vulnerable.”

To answer the above; I would submit that a baby is vulnerable and unable to care for themselves. The defendant was vulnerable? Yeah okay, she clearly was distressed that is why she went on a week long drinking bender.

Let’s get to the crux or cold bleeding heart of this case and why it distressed me. I read this and expected that the outcome reported would be murder. “Guilty of manslaughter.” Guilty. The distinguishing feature of murder from manslaughter is the mental intention, or the mens rea, of the defendant.

To commit the murder with direct intention is to intend a particular outcome or consequence of the defendants actions or act – the actus reas. In other words, the defendant knows that their actions will result in death, that is their intention. On the other hand, still coming under murder, albeit to a somewhat lesser extent and I am hesitant to call any type of murder lesser, is oblique intention. You see, oblique intention is where a human being foresees a natural consequence of their actions as virtually certain – the virtually certain test set out in the case of R v Woollin – a case in which the defendant threw his baby at a wall causing death.

When discussing manslaughter, we have involuntary and voluntary. Unfortunately, this is a reflection of poor reporting, the article I read failed to mention what manslaughter variety our killer mother had been charged and found guilty of. We can allude, but I refrain from making assumptions based on the fact that it states she was very vulnerable.

Conclusion:

Here we have a case that will cause people to get upset and cry. But what has been done to prevent this? A known vulnerable teenager, who has a baby, and is heavily influenced with a youngsters lifestyle… Again, systemic failures within the social care system which has resulted in another loss of a babies life. When will the system learn and start to actually do what they are paid to do?

Let’s briefly touch on the sentence, a 9 year stretch, assuming that includes the 1/3 off. Now, realistically, the mother will probably be doing half of that. Another failure? The system doesn’t have the finances to fund and keep prisoners, it’s more economic to keep criminals in society paying taxes you know. It’s not the judge or barristers or solicitors that need slapping, it’s the government for failing to recognise or acknowledge that the system they have deluded themselves into believing is working, isn’t.

If the country functioned and had a well funded legal system and kept people happy, would we be seeing children murdering with intention, other children? Where did we cross the line in allowing our children to become such evil little *****?

I leave you with a question. Given the sentence, would you:

a) Find her guilty of murder

b) change the sentence

c) ban under 18s from having children?

Thanks for reading and have a brilliant day.