Edward Humes is well-recognized for his book No Matter How Loud I Shout, by showing readers stories about troubled kids that end up in the juvenile justice system. Are these troubled teens born with criminality? Do environmental factors affect the behavior and actions of the juveniles? Or is it the juvenile center’s problem with how we are dealing with these kids? These questions go hand in hand with two juveniles discussed in the book named Carla James and George Trevino. Both these teens have had family problems, and the relationships of friends affect them in a negative way.
Carla James was a straight A student in honors. She was recognized by many teachers and staff as being one of the best students who was always on tasks and sometimes even knew how to run the school better than the faculty there. She was very close with her counselor, Carla told her about her father passing and her mother getting remarried. Before the drive-by shooting, Carla had received various status offenses like truancy and running away. These were minor offenses but they still led up to what she did after. The first drive-by shooting, Carla, and her two gang members fled the scene and Carla was the one who pulled the trigger. The judge let her go but after that incident, two months later she was charged with grand theft auto, theft of property and two counts of stolen property. She was released the same day after her mother pleaded she should stay in jail. The Probation Department dismissed it like nothing happened, but that was a mistake because Carla was involved in another drive-by shooting. This time the department put her in a juvenile hall. She listened, paid attention and ran the hall like she ran the school. A few months passed, and she was convicted of theft and assault with a deadly weapon and received four years and four months to stay in Youth Authority.
Carla James case is determined by both the Psychological theory and Sociological theory. As stated before she had a rough childhood, her father who passed away early on and her mother who remarried right away. She felt as if her mother and brother/sisters were moving on too quickly and didn’t even care about the passing of their family member. The Social Learning Theory is when the juvenile has a traumatic early childhood experience or when their homes are poor training grounds for the child, which really affects the behavior and actions of the juvenile. In Carla’s situation, she had a good childhood however she did have a traumatic experience with her father passing, so this might have led to the “no care about what happens to her” path. Another theory that is similar to Carla is the Labeling Theory. This theory talks about the process of how children get defined as juveniles. After Carla’s first drive-by shooting, the police already defined her as a juvenile, so she already knew and acted as if she was a delinquent. She fulfilled the self-fulfilling prophecy. It is said in the labeling theory that people who define themselves as delinquents, will often associate themselves with other delinquents. This is true because Carla often associated herself with her gang members, also known as her “homies”.
This case was decided in a very unorganized manner. When Carla committed her first crime, which was the drive-by shooting she should’ve been punished for it rather than the case being expunged. After every crime, she did, she was released like nothing happened. For Juveniles to stop continuing on the path they are on they need some consequences and order. After the first drive-by shooting, she should have served some time. California’s automatic transfer laws include an agreement in criminal court for delinquents who are sixteen and older unless evidence is shown. The automatic transfer laws do not apply with Carla’s case. In California, many juveniles that are waived as adults into criminal courts get less time in Youth Authority, like Carla than the Juvenile Justice System. The court is mandated to impose the least restrictive sentence possible for the lesser crimes and status offenses that Carla committed. This kind of juveniles, similar to Carla, is known as the sixteen percenters. The sixteen percenters conferring poor quality crime offenses have neglected to get the consideration and administrations they require for recovery at the Juvenile Justice System, also, disappear in time, undetected by the understandings between the organizations of the courts. The Court’s careless routine with regards to ignoring the notice signs of the offenses and in its keeping of wrong or lost adolescent records have come about with insignificant possibilities for juveniles to get help.
George Trevino was born in a family that had no money, living in a van with his mom and two siblings until age six. George entered the welfare system as a dismissed child, bringing about detachment from every relative. Regardless of the way that George hopped from home to home, persisting a very long time in child care, he, in the long run, flourished when allowed to stay in an arrangement for one entire year. In what turned into a disappointment by the welfare, the State expelled George from this steady condition and expected that his best advantages were suited somewhere else. He was then put with his uncle and aunt, one a drug dealer, the other a substance abuser. George relapsed and displayed characteristics he never had. His grades were going down and his trust behavior continued which ended in criminal conduct. Accordingly, his welfare case was ended, and he was moved to the juvenile justice system. It shows that when George was put into a steady environment he thrived and his grades improved. During his trial, no information was presented about his past and his life in the foster care system. The trial discussed his crimes and what he did.