Life without parole unjust for under 21 Year olds...



Life without parole unjust for under 21 Year olds...

According to the Supreme Court in Massachusetts sending under 21 year olds to prison for life without the

possibility of parole is unjust. The State's highest court ruled that anyone under the age of 21 cannot be

sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, raising it from under 18.  There was a 4-3 ruling

in favour of the ban, describing life without parole sentences for those under 21 as cruel and unusual under

the Massachusetts Constitution.

At the centre of this case was the finding which confirms that the brains of emerging adults are similar to that

of juveniles.

In 2013 the court ruled that defendants under 18 could not be sentenced to life without parole based on the

fact that "it is not possible to prove that a juvenile is irretrievably depraved," thus under these circumstances

such a

severe sentence is unjustified."

This ruling took place in the Commonwealth V. Sheldon Mattis case, which extends that finding up to the

age

of 21.

Mattis was aged 18, when in 2013 he was convicted of the murder of Jaivon Blake in 2011, the victim of a

shooting death. Mattis was sentenced to life without parole. His 17 year old co-defendant, was sentenced to

15 years.

As a result of the Massachusetts ruling, Mattis will appear in court for resentencing and to make his case in

front of the parole board., and will provide an opportunity for others to follow suit.

There are numerous examples of individuals being sentenced to a life without parole sentence;

Massachusetts

has over 1,000 such people.

I don't know the details of any of those in Massachusetts but do know about cases in Florida and Texas.

Jennifer Mee from Florida was only 19 when she was found guilty of first degree murder but honestly, the

The definition of what she had done is manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter as it would be called in

the US.

Jennifer was involved in a fatal mugging of a young man she agreed to go out on a date with. There was no

intent to kill on Jennifer's part and nothing in her trial suggests otherwise. Jennifer was not even in possession

of a firearm. She and her two male offenders all received a life without parole sentence. Is this kind of

sentence appropriate under the circumstances?

I don't think so.

Just recap; Jennifer was unarmed, had no intention of killing the victim, and was 19.

Her sentence of life without parole is out of proportion to the circumstances of this particular case with the

main factor being her lack of premeditation in the tragedy.

The Massachusetts ruling applies to Jennifer but the problem is she is in a Florida prison and it is just a

question of when Florida will change their system if they ever do so.

What do others think?

Emotions run high in cases such as this. People do not think rationally and comments such as "She deserves

to spend the rest of her life in prison" and "You do the crime you do the time," appears on social media.

If you would like to fill out the petition calling for a ban on life without parole for under 21 year olds then

click on the link at the bottom of this article or visit www.freejennifer.blogspot.com and you will find the

petition link there.


https://bit.ly/3UzonHU

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SOCIAL STATUS & AMERICAN SENTENCING

Image
Sentencing based on social standing At high school when someone got the cane or strap, the other kids would make fun of the person if they were not that popular but if they were popular among their peers then after getting the strap or cane it would always  be, "Mr so and so is a w*****. It is the same in real life where people get treated according to their personality, attractiveness, and their social status.  As far as the American justice system is concerned, I think it would be extremely simplistic to say "Everyone is treated the same way," and the various sentences handed down by judges reflects this. The sentencing of Jennifer Mee is a prime example. She was convicted of first degree murder. What was her crime? She participated in a fatal robbery and all those who took part in a robbery where someone dies are equally guilty of murder whether were directly or indirectly involved in the death. As far as Jennifer's situation is concerned, it app...
Read more

Justice for Jennifer

Image
Written by R. A. Stewart A criminal justice system needs to be fair to everyone; those affected by the offender’s action and the offender. Sentences must reflect the seriousness of the crime taking into account the various aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Justice can mean different things to different people.  I can tell you what justice is not. It is not a means of taking revenge on people who have wronged you. A sound justice system should not be an “Eye for an eye” system where whatever the offender did to someone then he or she faces the same punishment. The “Get tough on crime” rhetoric spouted by politicians in the US and other countries around the world is only peddling to the vigilant brigade who are baying for blood. It may win some votes, and it may make some voters feel good for a while, but at the end of the day nothing changes. Voters must be getting fed up with politicians who jump on the prevailing bandwagon. America already has the toughest sentences in the...
Read more

Jennifer needs your help

Image
Written by R. A. Stewart Jennifer Mee was convicted of first degree murder but it was a murder she did not carry out herself or one which there was no intent or premeditation involved. How is this so you may be wondering. In Florida if someone dies as a result of another crime such as robbery then all participants are equally guilty of the death irrespective of the part they played. Here is a summary of the case: In 2010 Jennifer, then aged 19, agreed to go out on a date with a young man she had contacted on Facebook. Jennifer’s motive was robbery, not romance, and with the help of two male friends she tried to rob her date, however, in the struggle he was fatally shot. Under Florida law, all participants in a fatal robbery are equally guilty of first degree murder. This is known as the “Felony rule.” There is no room for discretion in the application of this rule. One is either guilty of it or not.  Intent or lack of it is not taken into consideration as it should be which means s...
Read more