The letter is in response to the article, “Supreme Court Ruling provides Juveniles with Second chance,” Thursday, June 28th, 2012.

While I do agree with the court, there are cases that should be reconsidered, children who were charged with life without parole. Children, especially in their teen years are likely to undertake more risks due to having undeveloped brains compared to adults. There are numerous cases involving teen offenders who as mature adults started programs helping other teens, see their follies. Offenders like these should see the chance for parole, as they have changed their lives and have grown to be mature citizens of our society.

However, I cannot agree with your assertion of making parole available to all juvenile offenders; there are teenagers whose crimes have a degree of brutality that’s not seen in the typical crimes of adults. Life without parole is typically not assigned to juvenile offenders, until unless they are guilty of first degree murder (Murder that is planned or Felony Murder). Should all of these offenders receive a chance for rehabilitation? Having an underdeveloped brain cannot be used as justification in certain cases, such as Johnny Freeman who first raped then murdered an underage minor or David Brio who marched a couple to their cellar before shooting them.

No, being underage cannot be used as a shield by those who commit such heinous crimes! By offering parole to a defendant you offer them a chance to get back on the streets of our communities. You make an assumption that they can be productive members of our communities and won’t lead back into a life of crime. Can such assumptions be made in aforementioned cases? Are we to trust an adult who as a teen, didn’t hesitate to commit such crimes?
Thank You.