SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Teenagers are more likely to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit because they are less able to make mature decisions, new research shows.
Experts have called for major changes to the criminal justice system after finding innocent younger people are far more likely admit to offences, even when innocent, than adults.
Those who carried out the study say teenagers should not be allowed to make deals where they face a lesser charge in return for pleading guilty. The study suggests young people are more likely to be enticed by these deals, and take what they see as an advantageous offer even when they have done nothing wrong.
Most criminal convictions in the UK and the USA occur as the result of guilty pleas, rather than trial. This means the majority of convictions are the result of decisions made by people accused of crimes rather than jurors.
The research was carried out in the USA, where a system known as "plea bargaining" is utilised, but the academics say their discovery has implications for countries across the world that allow teenagers accused of crimes to receive a sentence or charge reduction by pleading guilty. Specifically, the researchers recommend restricting reductions that may entice innocent teenagers into pleading guilty and making it easier for teenagers to change pleas after they have been entered.
Other research has found adolescents are less able to perceive risk and resist the influence of peers because of developmental immaturity.
https://phys.org/news/2018-03-teenagers-guilty-crimes-didnt-commit.html
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Saturday March 17 2018, @06:21PM (2 children)
Torture implies the the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty. [dictionary.com].
I am not obliged to defend this position because I do not hold it.
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Saturday March 17 2018, @09:49PM (1 child)
Say what? You _do_ hold the position that corporal punishment is morally worse than imprisonment, so - yes you do need to defend this. BTW, you definition of torture agrees with mine, and does not apply to judicially administered punishment.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Saturday March 17 2018, @10:19PM
No, I hold the position that both are immoral unless we have to to isolate a person from society either for their protection or for the protection of those around them. I would rather society acts to minimize harm and only imprison people if it's necessary to prevent further harm. Furthermore I hold the position that corporal punishment does not reduce the risk of re-offending as much as imprisonment and in fact is likely to increase the risk, through this is an opinion I've formed through anecdotal observations, so I' don't feel qualified to argue that point, which is why I did not.
So if the law decreed it's not rape to punish people by tying them to a pillory and publicly violating them as a form of "judicially administered punishment" would you consider that not to be rape? Morality is what we use to define laws, not the other way around. Just because a society decides to accept an action as legal, that doesn't make the action moral.