The consideration of age as a factor in determining the level of justice system applicable gives rise to two distinct classes of judicial courts. They include the juvenile court judicial system for the young offenders and the adult/criminal court judicial system for the adults. It is however unfortunate that it has come to a situation where the original purpose of the juvenile court system has been turned in just like criminal just system. The introduction of the waiver processes has turned the juvenile judicial system into just another kind of adult court. It is however advantageous in some other ways dictated by the public interest in their security.
The juvenile court system is a system created for the young offenders as an institution of a state that offer similar treatment, guardianship and punishment of either a dependent of independent child. As much as these juvenile offenders have the right to caution, in preference to guardianship at these institutions, the sentences judges present at whichever level will much depend on influence adversely favoring “reports completed by juvenile probation officers to create personalized justice based on the needs of the juveniles and risks they present to reoffend” (McShane & Williams, 2003, p. 134). The potential attention they receive is similar as the adult justice system. These limits on this can however vary from issuing warnings, to unconditional releases and going to probation institutions as well as penalties and jail. These violent youth offenders usually present a considerable task to the juvenile system, which then calls for better ways to serve justice appropriately. Waiver processes come in play to deal with such situations in belief that the can provide more effective justice hence better results. Transferred juveniles also present a challenge to the criminal court judges in that they much have probation options compared to available criminal sentences (Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2008) and thus Jackson can perhaps be optional to go in to probation institutions. Because he has previous criminal reports, judges at criminal courts following a waiver process can be lead to the pardon of the judge to look in to his characters, which can lead to even severe sentences. However, the court can also offer individualistic justice, which can present cheaper sentences.
In addition to the above options, Jackson has potential options of judicial disposition sentencing options. Based on the seriousness of his current violent offence, diversion to probation institutions can or cannot be an option. The position on this much depends on the location where the crime was committed. Either this can favor him or not simply because of the different procedures which different states follow to determine justice on such crimes. Some may allow a single diversion while others can offer more chances irrespective of the crimes committed (McShane & Williams, 2003).
The juvenile judicial system presents a number of possible considerate sentencing of violent young offenders. As a human being, Jackson has the his own rights which must be respected, by considering him as a juvenile rather than an adult offender and therefore he has just to counseling which challenges the possible reference to adult criminal courts which present severe sentences. The system of ambivalence also offers the chance of mixed justice presenting merged sentencing options. The presentation of temperament and probation centers is a possible option for Jackson. Although these can fail to present the deserved justice to the troublesome offenders, like Jackson, they also offer possible sentence options.
With an alarming increase in the rate of juvenile violent offenders, options are available to counteract such situations. These can include transfers of cases to adult criminal courts from juvenile courts and having optional sentences for the young offenders as earlier noted. With young offenders like Jackson presenting threat, the interest to protect the public while presenting judicial proceeding consequently to these juveniles, means that the correctional programs have changed to be equal to the task (Torbet, 1996). This means Jackson can face criminal sentences irrespective of his age; he can therefore get straight adult incarceration. He can also have right to graduate incarceration in which he can receive adult sentences but remain in jail at the juvenile prisons, or remain at the adult probations centers, but separate from the adults until the time his age can allow him to be joining with the other adult offenders. This can happen if he fails to achieve the set correctional standards, but if Jackson makes to achieve these set standards, there is a possibility for him to go free. The other option is that he can receive a segregated incarceration in which he receives adult sentence in an adult court as an adult, and put in a class of a young adult with a loyal correctional program but at different institution. In addition, he can have special or unspecialized programs, which legally guard him as a youthful offender who is responsible for his own actions with interest of public defense presenting the back to basics option (Torbet, 1996).
Moreover, he can go on a split probation in which he can serve 3 to 6 jail months of his sentence and then go on probation. Within the time in jail, he can encounter severe labor that can contribute to his behavior change. As much as all these sentences are possible to violent juveniles, as Jackson, going either to jail or on probation, the judgment is dependent on the real possibility of danger and the convict’s crime records as well as the seriousness of the current offence (Kupchik, 2006). Having a prior criminal record, Jackson can have favorable or unfavorable court proceedings, which entirely depends on the above discussion.