Race and the fragility of the legal distinction between juveniles and adults.

Legal precedent establishes juvenile offenders as inherently less culpable than adult offenders and thus protects juveniles from the most severe of punishments. But how fragile might these protections be? In the present study, simply bringing to mind a Black (vs. White) juvenile offender led partici...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aneeta Rattan, Cynthia S Levine, Carol S Dweck, Jennifer L Eberhardt
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/fa02f4a5a68443a7ae6282a801f0d20c
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Legal precedent establishes juvenile offenders as inherently less culpable than adult offenders and thus protects juveniles from the most severe of punishments. But how fragile might these protections be? In the present study, simply bringing to mind a Black (vs. White) juvenile offender led participants to view juveniles in general as significantly more similar to adults in their inherent culpability and to express more support for severe sentencing. Indeed, these differences in participants' perceptions of this foundational legal precedent distinguishing between juveniles and adults accounted for their greater support for severe punishment. These results highlight the fragility of protections for juveniles when race is in play. Furthermore, we suggest that this fragility may have broad implications for how juveniles are seen and treated in the criminal justice system.