A lot of people ask the “does age matter?” when it comes to cases like those of Lionel Tate and Nathaniel Brazill. In this paper I chose to discuss just exactly what age is supposed to mean when it comes to committing a crime, especially murder. I’ve compared two cases rather similar in crime, but with two different outcomes. The goal of this comparison was to show that there needs to be two separate justice systems to acknowledge the varying circumstances that are faced in the different cases presented in court. The outcome of the two cases sheds a light on the importance of acknowledging the mind and mental stability of the criminal on trial, in this case, a juvenile. My take on this idea is that there is a certain line that has to be crossed, for a child to be tried as an adult. This “line” I speak of could be determined by many things such as mental stability, the intensity of the crime, and the circumstances of the crime. The juvenile court system was made for a reason; it provides certain benefits that are not gifted to adults who commit crimes, and children charged in adult court systems. By having these two separate courts, we have drawn a line, separating the two groups; juveniles from adults. Juveniles are more impulsive, they usually don’t think before they make decisions, and they focus more on pleasing their own ego ,instead, of logically focusing on their general benefit. According to the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, actions of juveniles are “guided more by the emotional and reactive amygdala and less by the thoughtful, logical frontal cortex” (AACAP 2016). This is not to say that all juvenile individuals are irrational and constantly make mistakes, but rather to say that they have not yet grown into the adult mindset to fully understand right from wrong. Having a joint adult and juvenile court system wouldn’t benefit anyone really because not every child who commits crime is a narcissistic sociopath waiting to strike again, and putting the two different groups in one court system would require holding them all to the same standards. In the cases I chose to compare, it shows two varying situations that I considered when I thought about my answer to the question, “does age matter?” In Lionel Tate’s case, I don’t believe his age mattered. After he was given that second chance, a lesser sentence compared to the life sentence he was facing, there was no shown growth and the incident just seemed to be something he chose to do, without really realizing the severity of his actions. One of the many goals of the juvenile system is to lower the recidivism of the defendant, and Lionel Tate did exactly the opposite. In these circumstances, Tate deserved to be charged as an adult, and the adult criminal justice system did its job sentencing a criminal to imprisonment. In Nathaniel Brazill’s case I believe his age did matter, and was a key element to why he did what he did. It was simply an adolescent mistake. In the heat of the moment he did what he thought would make him seem big and bad, and in return it cost a man his life. However, while he was incarcerated, he chose to turn his life around. He showed how rehabilitation helped him in his situation. Instead of turning around and being stuck in the same criminalistic ways, he became determined to prove to himself and the family of his victim, that he could be of some good to the world and positively contribute to society when he is finally released. They were both given the same opportunity to avoid being sentenced as an adult and serving life in prison, but only one of them made the choice to do right and turn their life around, taking advantage of the second chance they were given, in a positive way. Without the juvenile court system, Nathaniel Brazill would have never got the second chance at life that he needed. Without the adult juvenile court system, Lionel Tate could have been released into the world and done further damage than he already did, to himself and to others. Both of these young men were charged in the adult court system, but without the juvenile court system there would be an abundance of minor crimes receiving outrageous sentences, due to the lack of a proper acknowledgement of the role that age plays in the mind of a criminal.
Does Age Matter?
Throughout your adolescent years, believe it or not you receive an abundance of chances. Chances to mess up and then fix it, chances to fall down and get back up, and chances to make mistakes and then learn from them. Although you do get this large abundance of chances, you have to be the one to decide whether or not you fix it, get back up, and learn from your mistakes. There’s been a pretty large debate on whether or not the age of the defendant should change the outcome of the sentence assigned to them for the crime they committed. I do believe that in these United States there should be a separate juvenile justice system, but that’s not as easy to prove. When you commit a crime as a child, the circumstances could be way different then if you were an adult. At the same time, in doing all this research I had to understand something very important to this topic. There are some crimes that are just so far out of my understanding that my opinion is trumped by the facts of the case. I could argue all day long about the development of the brain, the predisposition the child may have been in, and the outside factors that could have played apart in the crime, but at the end of the day, when a life is lost, there is a price that has to be paid. Sometimes it’s not as simple as a prison sentence like it was for Nathaniel Brazill. Sometimes jail or probation just isn’t enough, like for Lionel Tate. As I considered all these varying situations and how they both ended so differently I still had one opinion that never changed. That was the stance that no juvenile offender should ever have to serve their jail time in the same institution as adult offenders. That is something I can’t seem to shake on. When a criminal is found to be mentally unstable, they are sent to a mental institution where they can be cared for as they should. That same rule should apply for children who commit crimes. They are not physically nor are they mentally stable enough to be placed in housing with adult offenders serving time for their crimes. Therefore, juvenile offenders, despite their actions, should remain in their own juvenile institutions. The United States Justice system is separated between adults and juveniles and it should remain that way to equally serve the needs of all citizens under the law of this land.
In the midst of all the cases I read up on to better understand this topic, there were two specific cases that stood out to me. One of those being the case of Lionel Tate. Tate was only 12 years old when he was sent to trial for the murder of 6-year-old Tiffany Eunick. This case left me in awe as I read the reports on her cause of death, his explanation, and all of the third parties involved. It was July 28, 1999 when Tiffany Eunick was found unresponsive in the Tate household. According to Tate, he had been playing with Tiffany, using some of the moves he had seen on pro-wrestling programs on Television. He told police that he had put Tiffany in headlock and she had hit her head, but the autopsy reports came back to show a very different story. Tiffany’s body had been beaten far worse than any headlock could be the blame for. According to the autopsy given by the medical examiner’s report, the injuries she suffered were as follows; “a partially severed liver, her brain ‘flattened’ and was swollen, her cheeks, nose, neck and chest were battered, and her right eye was hemorrhaging” (Yanez 1999). The story that they were trying to portray, of a playdate gone wrong, was no longer a good enough excuse for Lionel Tate’s actions. To make matters worse Lionel Tate had no sympathy towards the outcome of his actions. The following day he asked Tiffany’s mother if he could “live with her now and have all of Tiffany’s toys”, shrugging his shoulders and rolling his eyes at the news of her death (Yanez 1999). Tate was the first child to be sentenced to life in prison and there was a lot of speculation following this decision. Was this too harsh for a 12 year child? Or were his actions too heinous to be treated with the delicacy of a juvenile case? His sentence was eventually reduced to 10 years of probation, only because he agreed to a deal in which he would plead guilty to second degree murder. In 2004, he was given an extra 5 years of probation after he was caught with a knife and in 2006, he returned to court again after robbing a pizza delivery man with a gun. You would think maybe by the second or third time he would of learned his lesson but that wasn’t the case with Lionel Tate. His competence and understanding of his actions were often questioned, but the judge felt that Tate was fully aware and understood his doings and his punishment (NBC News 2006). As stated before, when you are a child you get chances upon chances, but in this case, Lionel Tate exhausted every last chance he could possibly get to turn his life around. They tried to use his age as an excuse for his actions, and in return he continuously portrayed the same signs of the criminality throughout the remainder of his probation, resulting in him gaining back the sentence he was first given. Tate’s continuous acts of defiance and constant disregard for the law got him put right back where he started, facing a life sentence in prison. So that leaves us with the question, “Did Lionel Tate’s age matter?” and the only answer I can honestly come up with is; no, it didn’t. Lionel Tate got off with no jail time, just probation, because the court thought his sentencing was too harsh for a 12 year old. Eventually he still ended up right back where he was intended to be in the first place.
Nathaniel Brazill on the other hand is quite a different story to tell. On May 26, 2000, 13 year old Nathaniel Brazill returned to his middle school after being sent home on the last day of school for throwing a water balloon. According to Brazill, his only intentions were to scare the teacher, Mr. Barry Grunow, who had sent him home earlier that day. Brazill returned to his classroom, demanding to see two of his female classmates. After Mr. Grunow denied his request, Nathaniel Brazill pulled out a gun and shot him in the face. Terrified by his own actions he took off running down the hallway, pointing the gun at another teacher when he startled Brazill as he walked out of one of the classrooms, intrigued by the noise. As Brazill fled the school, he stopped a police officer he knew and told him what had just happened. Mr. Grunow died from the single gunshot wound, and Brazill was soon after arrested. At first he was charged with first degree murder, as an adult, and sentenced to life in prison. After some deliberation, he was sentenced to 28 years in prison, 2 years of house arrest, and then 5 years of probation. The charge he received was second degree murder and aggravated assault. If it were left up to the family of Mr. Grunow, Nathaniel Brazill would be serving a life sentence, or nothing less than 40 years. Luckily for Brazill, the judge had other ideas. In an interview conducted 11 years into his sentence, Nathaniel Brazill is now a full grown adult, still serving his time in prison. This interview was being conducted because Brazill had gotten into some more legal issues, but not the kind you’d think of, like in Lionel Tate’s case. While serving his 28 year sentence behind bars, Brazill used his time to earn his GED at the age of 16, become a certified paralegal at the age of 18, and become certified by the prison system as a law clerk at 21 (Palm Beach Post 2010). He was in the news because he was actually using his legal skills that he picked up while incarcerated to file a lawsuit against the saying that his civil rights were violated (WPTV 2:10). He ensures the interviewer that he “has not wasted” his time and has spent it doing things “that better” himself (Palm Beach Post 2010). Isn’t that supposed to be the goal of incarceration? Rehabilitation? When the question is posed now, “does age matter?” I had to sit back and think about my answer. Nathaniel Brazill committed a crime, learned his lesson, accepted his punishment, and turned his life around. It didn’t take a life sentence for him to do that.
I know at first glance it may seem as if the two stories aren’t much different, but when you look at the facts that surround the case you see my dilemma in the decision upon the question, “does age matter?” They both were underaged, both committed murder, both were raised in a single parent household, both suffered from some sort of childhood trauma; Lionel Tate and the neglect of his mother and Nathaniel Brazill with the bullying from peers and teachers and also witnessing his mother suffer domestic abuse. Along with all those similarities there was an abundance of things that set them apart. Unlike Tate, Brazill took advantage of the time he served in jail, turned his life around and became a contributor to society rather than a menace. In both cases they were given a second chance, a relief from the life sentence they could have been punished with. Unfortunately, only one of these young men turned out to benefit from this courtesy. In the Lionel tate case there was never a sign of remorse, never a hint of guilt, and barely enough evidence to paint a picture of some sort of friendship between Lionel and Tiffany. According to Prosecutor Padowitz, “the two had just met two weeks before” (Yanez 1999). Though the family may not have accepted his pleas for forgiveness, Nathaniel Brazill openly stated in court “Words cannot really explain how sorry I am, but they’re all I have” (ABC News 2001). If the goal of the criminal justice system is to incarcerate those who do wrong, teach them a lesson, and rehabilitate them so that they can return to society, why should Lionel Tate spend the rest of his life in jail, improving a character he’ll never be able to show to the world?
There is a special part of the brain with the responsibility of our instant reactions, like when we’re put in certain situations and we become afraid or angry. This area of the brain is called the Amygdala and develops early in your life. The Amygdala is actually fully developed at birth, so it only makes sense that it be the main use of children in their decision making. According to The University of Rochester Medical Center, “The rational part of a teen’s brain isn’t fully developed and won’t be until age 25 or so” (Sather,RN; Shelat, MD). Adults typically use their Prefrontal Cortex. This area of the brain is used to control reasoning, good judgement, and it’s the reason why most adults think of the “long-term consequences”, before acting on a thought (Sather,RN; Shelat, MD). If the average child is using their Amygdala to make their decisions, how can we treat them as if they had that biological advantage that adults have when making important decisions using that Prefrontal Cortex that they have already developed? The child mind is simply not as developed as the mind of an adult. That doesn’t justify their actions, or excuse them from being held accountable, but it must be acknowledged that it doesn’t require the same amount of thought to go into committing a crime as a child, as it does an adult. The medical reviewers of The Rochester Medical Center said it best by stating, “when teens experience overwhelming emotional input, they can’t explain later what they were thinking. They weren’t thinking as much as they were feeling” (Sather,RN; Shelat, MD). Nathaniel Brazill states in one of his interviews that pulling out the gun he used to fatally shoot Mr. Grunow, was a “split-second decision” to “scare him with the gun” (WPBF News 1:50). In another interview he says he was carrying the gun because it made him feel “big” and “powerful” (WPTV 0:45). This is a perfect example of the thought process of a child. Now that Nathaniel Brazill has grown up, 24 years of age in these two interviews, his thought process is no longer the same, often stating that he regrets his decisions that day.
In conclusion, the separation of criminal justice systems allows a more in depth way to understand why criminals do the things that they do. If we were to assume that everyone who has ever killed someone did it with knowledge of what they were doing, and intent to kill, there would as many prisons as there are homes in America (For the record there are 126.6 million houses and 2.3 million prisons). The adult court systems are designed to deal with adult offenders because they have run out of the excuse of not being aware. The youth of America do not need the burden of a unified court system to further implement the harsh punishment and cruel justifications used to put our generation behind bars. Until the mind of a child is proven to be fully developed as that of an adults, the two court systems should remain separated.
References
14-Year-Old Brazill Gets 28 Years. (July). Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92706&page=1
Aacap. (2016, September). Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.aacap.org/aacap/families_and_youth/facts_for_families/fff-guide/the-teen-brain-behavior-problem-solving-and-decision-making-095.aspx
Lionel Tate. (2006, May 19). Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/lionel-tate
Michon, K. (2014, May 20). Juvenile Delinquency: What Happens in a Juvenile Case? Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/juvenile-delinquency-what-happens-typical-case-32223.html
Michon, K. (2014, May 20). Juvenile Delinquency: What Happens in a Juvenile Case? Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/juvenile-delinquency-what-happens-typical-case-32223.html
Murphy, P. T. (2001, May 17). Convicted at 14. Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/17/opinion/convicted-at-14.html
Neural – Amygdala Development. (n.d.). Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/Neural_-_Amygdala_Development
PalmBeachPost. (2018, July 29). Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAXpIDFiOYg
Reaves, J. (2001, May 17). Should the Law Treat Kids and Adults Differently? Retrieved November 20, 2018, from http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,110232,00.html
Sather, R., RN, & Shelat, A., MD (Eds.). (n.d.). Understanding the Teen Brain . Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051
WPTV News | West Palm Beach Florida. (2011, September 12). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-dDOkWKo0
WriterSun-Sentinel, L. Y., & Holland, J. (2018, September 30). AUTOPSY REVEALS BRUTAL BEATING. Retrieved November 20, 2018, from https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1999-08-14-9908131171-story.html