|
The Senate will vote in January 2008 on proposed legislation that would ban life without parole for juveniles. The legislation, SB 999, is sponsored by the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), Human Rights Watch, and other advocates. The bill was approved by the Senate Public Safety Committee in 2007.
“Children have an extraordinary capacity for rehabilitation,” said Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco), a child psychologist and co-author of the bill with Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), Sen. Jack Scott (D-Pasadena), and Sen. Gilbert Cedillo (D-Los Angeles). “The neuroscience is clear; brain maturation continues well through adolescence and thus impulse control, planning, and critical thinking skills are still not yet fully developed. SB 999 reflects that science and provides the opportunity for compassion and rehabilitation that we should exercise with minors.”
The legislation has the support of the ACLU, Amnesty International, and the California Psychiatric Association, about 30 other national and state organizations favoring the bill. The Sacramento Bee published an editorial in November urging the bill’s passage.
A recent report by the University of San Francisco Center for Law and Global Justice said that nationwide, 2,387 juveniles are in prison for life. California has 237 juveniles serving life without parole sentences, ranking it second in the country behind Pennsylvania for the highest number of juveniles serving life sentences. Some were as young as 14 when they committed their crimes.
Human Rights Watch is planning to issue a report in January that will profile individuals in California who are serving life without parole for crimes committed under the age of 18.
In the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision Roper v. Simmons, the Court banned the juvenile death penalty, determining that minors need to be considered differently than adults in sentencing due to differences in brain development, emotional maturity, and a greater capacity for rehabilitation. These differences counsel against sentencing adolescents to life without parole.
SB 999, also known as the California Juvenile Life Without Parole Reform Act, would amend the Penal Code so that a child who commits a crime could not be sentenced to life; instead, a sentence of 25 years to life in prison would be imposed. The youth would not have the opportunity to request parole unless he or she had served the 25-year term. The parole board would then determine whether the individual deserved to be released or should remain in prison.
Nationally, 51 percent of juveniles sentenced to life without parole are first-time offenders.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the world’s oldest human rights treaty, prohibits the imposition of this sentence on juveniles. The US is one of only two countries worldwide that permits the sentencing of juveniles to life without parole. There are only seven known cases outside the US.
Life Without Parole in California
A number of California cases have recently been highlighted in the media due to the background of the juveniles who received the sentences, and the circumstances surrounding their crimes. One such case involves Sara Kruzan, now 28. She was raised in Riverside by her abusive, drug-addicted mother. Sara saw her father just three times in her life because he was in prison.
Since the age of 9, Sara suffered from severe depression for which she was hospitalized several times. At the age of 11, she met a 31-year-old man named G.G. who molested her and began grooming her to become a prostitute. At age 13, she began working as a prostitute for G.G. and was repeatedly molested by him. At age 16, Sara was convicted of killing him. She was sentenced to prison for the rest of her life despite her background and a finding by the California Youth Authority that she was amendable to treatment offered by the juvenile system.
“Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release,” said Senator Yee. “It also means minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison. This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform and it is not a humane way to handle children. While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst.”
“The practice of sentencing juveniles to die in prison is unconscionable, especially given recent scientific proof that adolescents are different than adults and have a greater potential for rehabilitation,” said Pat Arthur, senior attorney at NCYL.
|
